[rhn-users] RHN Website Questions

[inode0]

On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 5:07 PM, Joe_Wulf <Joe_Wulf at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hello, just wondering if this group is still alive---if anyone from Red Hat
> is watching.

While there are people from Red Hat watching, this isn't an official
Red Hat support channel. Some help from time to time anyway because
they are nice.

> Testing.........
>
> R,
> -Joe Wulf, CISSP, VCP, USN(RET)
>  Senior IA Engineer
>  ProSync Technology Group, LLC
>  www.prosync.com
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: rhn-users-bounces at redhat.com [mailto:rhn-users-bounces at redhat.com] On
> Behalf Of Joe_Wulf
> Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2009 23:56
> To: rhn-users at redhat.com
> Subject: [rhn-users] RHN Website Questions
>
>
>
> Hello,
>
> I'm a user of my company's access to the RHN website.  I'm a new subscriber
> to this list, as it seemed the
> most appropriate one.  I've looked over the past 2 years of messages, sorted
> by date and did not find
> anything regarding my questions, or their answers.  Further, I've studied
> the RHN documentation
> (rhn.redhat.com/ rhn/help/reference/rhn500) without much success either
> towards better answering my
> questions.
>
> Should there be a better place for me to address my questions, please direct
> me.  Thank you.
>
> What resource can I leverage to become aware of changes to the web page
> content of the RHN web pages
> without having to manually walk through each web page and cross-reference
> with our directory/file structure?
>      I've access to our local master replicated copy of the ISO's from RHN
> for which we are entitled to.  Our
>      work with them is within a private isolated LAN.  The challenge is
> keeping up with not just the new OS
>      releases (we can anticipate those due to the publicity) but also all
> the other elements.

What web pages? What directory/file structure? Are you trying to save
a local copy of all the content on RHN that you are entitled to?

> It seems the five entries for MRG (under RHEL5 x32 and x64 bit) are total
> duplicates of each other, down to
> the MD5 sums.  If they are all, literally, the same, why not simply have one
> comprehensive entry?

Stuff has to be organized in some fashion and by architecture makes a
lot of sense. Just because some package might work on i386 and x86_64
doesn't mean it will work on the other supported architectures, right?

John