View Issue Details
|ID||Project||Category||View Status||Date Submitted||Last Update|
|0004643||CentOS-6||virt-v2v||public||2010-11-26 14:55||2011-07-05 20:27|
|Product Version||Pre Release|
|Target Version||Fixed in Version|
|Summary||0004643: Probably needs to include a script for CentOS VMs|
|Description||that package provides a script to handle Red Hat machines. It seems that this script can be left 'as-is' but probably we should add a CentOS script similar to the Red Hat one or patch that script to handle correctly CentOS Guests that will be used with that v2v tool:|
concerned files :
|Tags||No tags attached.|
The script description says:
Sys::VirtV2V::GuestOS::RedHat provides an interface for manipulating and
querying a Red Hat based Linux guest. Specifically it handles any Guest OS which
Sys::Guestfs::Lib has identified as 'linux', which uses rpm as a package format.
I doubt that the above is worth a repackage. At least to me it definitely does not look as a brand issue.
I can confirm it does its magic on "redhat-based" distributions, actually meaning ones using rpm-format. And that's the "RedHat package manager" after all. When detecting the OS (to use with your virt-v2v.conf) it actually detects os "centos", so that's okay (and it would propose to install a separate kernel for it etc. instead of just using a rhel-kernel). But it still uses the GuestOS::RedHat-module to work on rpm-based files.
Personally I don't see a branding-issue here.
The source rpm contains a file RHEV-Application_Provisioning_Tool_46267.exe which gets installed as rhev-apt.exe. This is an Installshield installer signed by 'Red Hat Inc'. The following name is used during the installation: 'RHEV-Application Provisioning Tool'
It installs the following files in C:\Program Files (x86)\Redhat\RHEV\apt :
It installs a local service called 'RHEV-apt' with description 'RHEV-Application Provisioning Tool' and it uses that RHSrvAny.exe.
I checked: Oracle Linux 6 x86_64 contains the exe file unmodified.
Is this also a branding issue?
it would be good to have a look at the license for that tool. If it's written by Red Hat, it's not a branding issue but we'd have to see if we can redistribute it 'as-is' or not ... on the other hand, i'm pretty sure that if Oracle (and their lawyers) decide to provide it unmodified, that it can be redistributed on our side too :-)
Thanks for the report Dries ;-)
|2010-11-26 14:55||arrfab||New Issue|
|2010-12-07 11:04||wolfy||Note Added: 0012184|
|2010-12-07 11:04||wolfy||Status||new => feedback|
|2011-01-10 03:31||neufeind||Note Added: 0012319|
|2011-02-26 17:08||driesverachtert||Note Added: 0012450|
|2011-02-26 17:34||arrfab||Note Added: 0012451|
|2011-07-05 20:27||toracat||Note Added: 0012891|