[elrepo] kernel/kernel-lts separation

[Nicolas Thierry-Mieg]

Phil Perry wrote:
> On 10/10/12 09:30, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
>> On 10/10/2012 11:21 AM, Nux! wrote:
>>> On 10.10.2012 09:12, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
>>>> On 10/10/2012 11:09 AM, Nux! wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Guys, is there a possibility to have the TLS kernels in their own
>>>>> repo or would it be just spreading too thin? Maybe some hardlinks as
>>>>> to not waste space.. I'm not using the lts kernel but I'm thinking
>>>>> many do and they don't want to have the lts kernel updated by the
>>>>> "latest" one.
>>>>> I know people who run kernel-ml should only be using it with
>>>>> --enablerepo anyway, but oh well, the idea just hit me so had to
>>>>> share. :-) +1 here. not that "LTS" means much when 3.0.x was updated
>>>>> twice in >2 weeks...
>>>
>>> It's not clear what you're +1 for. :)
>> Oh well. +1 for separating LTS. "kernel-ml" is too broad now, covering
>> 3-4 different versions.
>>
>
>
> Great suggestion. I agree, it makes sense to separate versions so yum is
> able to intelligently update within a branch.
>
> How can we best achieve that? Repo separation is one method. Are there
> any other ways we could achieve it with some yum versioning trickery or
> is repo separation our only option - just thinking through the
> alternatives.

perhaps you could rename the packages kernel-ml-lts and keep them in the 
same repo, not sure if it's better than a separate repo but I don't see 
other options.