Re: RHEL 6 Beta

On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 10:57:54PM +0200, Nicolas Chauvet wrote: > 2010/4/23 Jack Neely <jjneely(a)ncsu.edu&gt;: > > On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 05:40:37PM +0200, Nicolas Chauvet wrote: > >> 2010/4/23 Jack Neely <jjneely(a)ncsu.edu&gt;: > >> > Folks, > >> > > >> > The RHEL 6 Beta is out and I'm interested in rpmfusion support for RHEL > >> > 6.  Sounds like EPEL will be branching in a week or two.  I'd like to > >> > put some work into making this happen. > >> > > >> > I guess the first step is to get RHEL6 Beta1 on more mirrors so that we > >> > can have easy access to the Yum repos. > >> I would be interested in creating an el-6 branch right now also. > >> But because anything above ffmpeg in F-13 is doomed because of > >> http://www.videolan.org/security/sa1003.html > >> I would branch some packages from F-13 tree. (and vlc from F-14). > >> > >> That been said most packages should be branched from F-12, so the question is: > >> How much of the current RPM Fusion packages maintainer do want to > >> support their package in EL-6 also ? > >> (so that we can eventually automatically branch packages from F-12) > >> > >> Nicolas (kwizart) > >> > >> ps: that been said, I cannot expect anything in el-? branches before > >> we solve two questions: > >> How to move to our own hosted koji build server infra ? > >> how to deal with kernel module in the EL world (where a stable kABI is > >> the rule). > >> > > > > I've been using the kmod standards as rpmfusion knows and loves with > > RHEL5 since it was released.  It works very well there.  I don't see > > this one as a blocker. > Which ones are you talking about?  kmod1 or kmod2 standard ? And which > one supports kABI if any ? > The point is: I'm not aware rpmfusion ever did kABI the way it's > currently done with Red Hat. > > Of course that's not about a blocker, but a decision to be made along > with a team to be in charge to maintain. > > Nicolas (kwizart) > I've used both kmodv1 and v2.  However neither support the kABI packaging model.

Being that we have limited resources and we have a model for maintaining kernel modules that works with Fedora, we should use that same model with RHEL6 unless there is some incompatibility. By the way...we are the "team."  :-)  I just don't think RHEL6 is different enough to re-engineer our processes for it.