|Anonymous | Login | Signup for a new account||2013-05-25 07:02 UTC|
|Main | My View | View Issues | Roadmap|
|View Issue Details|
|ID||Project||Category||View Status||Date Submitted||Last Update|
|0005141||CentOS-5||-OTHER||public||2011-09-23 06:06||2012-08-02 20:34|
|Target Version||Fixed in Version|
|Summary||0005141: subscription-manager and python-rhsm packages are not needed for CentOS|
|Description||As announced at http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-announce/2011-September/017984.html [^] , http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-announce/2011-September/017986.html [^] and http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-announce/2011-September/017950.html [^] , there are now the following new packages:|
subscription-manager.x86_64 : Tools and libraries for subscription and repository management
subscription-manager-firstboot.x86_64 : Firstboot screens for subscription manager
subscription-manager-gnome.x86_64 : A GUI interface to manage Red Hat product subscriptions
python-rhsm.noarch : A Python library to communicate with a Red Hat Unified Entitlement Platform
I believe these packages should not be included in CentOS.
Just a preliminary comment that I seem to have missed the existence of http://candlepinproject.org/ [^] , so including those packages in CentOS might not be a particularly bad idea after all.
However, the packages contain multiple references to the upstream vendor which might be a problem. See the manpage of subscription-manager, /etc/rhsm/rhsm.conf, 'subscription-manager register' with a bogus username+password and subscription-manager-gui for some examples. I suppose subscription-manager-firstboot has some upstream-specific stuff as well, but I haven't checked that yet.
I've been looking at the packages and my current patches can be seen at http://miuku.net/tmp/subscription-manager/ [^]
Some questions still left to be answered:
- some filenames such as /etc/dbus-1/system.d/com.redhat.SubscriptionManager.conf
- D-Bus service names, should they be org.centos.* instead
- certificates in etc-conf/ca; there are certificates for candlepin, akamai and redhat, can these be distributed?
- which CA should be used for generating yum repo configurations, see rhsm.conf:repo_ca_cert -- currently it's apparently RH's CA
- localizations in po -- we can't just search&replace Red Hat with CentOS as there's no CentOS Network nor CentOS Entitlement Platforms etc.
- RHN_CLASSIC_WARNING shouldn't be visible with CentOS, it might be left as is
- repolib.py uses redhat.repo as a filename
- different login methods? The code mentions RHN Satellite, for example.
|My point is the following : as long as we don't have a complete view on the whole 'subscription-*' packages, i'd remove them from the distro.|
I'd be inclined to support arrfab's opinion in this matter. Besides, these are rather laborious packages for debranding, especially the localizations will be tricky to handle correctly.
The packages for C5 are already out there and they'd need to be taken care of somehow, but for C6 I'd propose not publishing these packages at all. Now that I looked, it appears that subscription-manager is not available for C6, but python-rhsm is now in the C6 CR repo. Oh well..
I'd be very happy if someone else than me would continue from here as I'll be swamped with other projects for the next few months.
|subscription-manager* packages have apparently been removed from C5.8, but python-rhsm is still included.|
|2011-09-23 06:06||avij||New Issue|
|2011-09-23 13:19||avij||Note Added: 0013357|
|2011-09-23 14:28||avij||Tag Attached: 6.1|
|2011-09-23 14:29||avij||Tag Attached: QA-6.1|
|2011-09-23 22:54||avij||Note Added: 0013362|
|2011-09-28 19:20||arrfab||Note Added: 0013418|
|2011-10-21 23:03||avij||Note Added: 0013597|
|2012-08-02 20:34||avij||Note Added: 0015573|
|Copyright © 2000 - 2011 MantisBT Group|