|Summary:||Separate out the Extras products on http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/ lists|
|Product:||Red Hat Satellite 5||Reporter:||Mark J. Cox <mjc>|
|Component:||Other||Assignee:||James Slagle <jslagle>|
|Status:||CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE||QA Contact:||Red Hat Satellite QA List <satellite-qa-list>|
|Version:||unspecified||CC:||bretm, rhn-bugs, security-response-team|
|Fixed In Version:||Doc Type:||Bug Fix|
|Doc Text:||Story Points:||---|
|Last Closed:||2005-07-20 18:41:33 UTC||Type:||---|
|oVirt Team:||---||RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:|
|Cloudforms Team:||---||Target Upstream Version:|
Description Mark J. Cox 2005-07-06 15:46:03 UTC
At the moment updates to RHEL4 base and Extras channels are merged on the /errata/ page (see http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/). Similarly RHEL3 base and Extras are merged. These need to be split asap, so that RHEL4 Extras and RHEL3 Extras packages have their own, separate, errata lists. Justification: A number of significant Critical security issues are affecting Extras packages over which we have limited control, but this is affecting the perception of our overall security, even though Extras is meant to be an unsupported add on. By merging them we increase customers expectations that packages in Extras will be treated in the same way as Base. Text on /errata/ page would be "Red Hat Enterprise Linux Extras (v. 3)" http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/rhel3-extras-errata.html "Red Hat Enterprise Linux Extras (v. 4)" http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/rhel4-extras-errata.html (There is no need to have separate pages for AS, WS, ES, Desktop etc -- channels can be rerouted and not included in multiple products) Example: http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2005-523.html Channel names for reference: 3AS-LACD 3Desktop-LACD 3ES-LACD 3WS-LACD 4AS-LACD 4Desktop-LACD 4ES-LACD 4WS-LACD Security team will QA this change when ready.
Comment 2 Mark J. Cox 2005-07-08 07:33:32 UTC
Seems to work nicely, both through /errata/ and through RHN once logged in. However one minor issue Looking here: https://rhn.webdev.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2004-556.html the SRPMS and ia32 rpms are listed 4 times (I guess once each for AS, ES, WS, Desktop).
Comment 4 Mark J. Cox 2005-07-08 18:29:55 UTC
Extras is a channel distinct from AS, ES, WS, so I think we should continue as is and not separate have separate extras for each variant. Perhaps put in a bugzilla against the /errata/ pages so that duplicated files for Extras packages don't show up 4 times.
Comment 5 James Slagle 2005-07-11 16:28:32 UTC
I've asked the dba's to push this change to QA. The Extras products won't be sorted quite as nicely as they were on dev, b/c doing so would require a pl/sql change, which would require us to take an outage to push this change. The sorting will be fixed for the rhn400 release which is scheduled for mid-August timeframe.
Comment 6 James Slagle 2005-07-11 18:56:35 UTC
The change is now on QA. Please verify at: rhn.webqa.redhat.com/errata
Comment 7 James Slagle 2005-07-14 19:14:17 UTC
Mark, have you guys had a chance to verify this in qa? Thanks.
Comment 8 Mark J. Cox 2005-07-14 20:11:03 UTC
Sorry, yes this looks fine :- even the positioning at /errata/. (Subject to the same problems as #4 where extras rpm's are listed multiple times -- which can be fixed later and not a showstopper for this change).
Comment 9 James Slagle 2005-07-20 18:41:33 UTC
This has been pushed to production. https://rhn.redhat.com/errata
Comment 10 Mark J. Cox 2005-07-20 21:02:55 UTC
Thank you for your fast response to this issue!