Bug 110360

Summary: kernel-hugemem available on RHEL3 ES channel
Product: [Retired] Red Hat Network Reporter: Dave Maley <dmaley>
Component: RHN/ChannelsAssignee: dff <dff>
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG QA Contact: Fanny Augustin <fmoquete>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: RHN StableCC: rhn-bugs
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
URL: https://rhn.redhat.com/network/software/channels/packages.pxt?cid=1187&filter_string=kernel&alphabar_column=NVRE
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2003-12-11 21:03:13 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Dave Maley 2003-11-18 19:59:46 UTC
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4.1)
Gecko/20031030

Description of problem:
the kernel-hugemem packages are available on the RHEL3 ES channel. 
This contradicts all of our product descriptions, where we state that
ES is limited to 2 CPU/8G RAM.  These package should be removed from
the channel.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1.login to RHN
2.go to RHEL3 ES channel
3.search for kernel
    

Actual Results:  kernel-hugemem is available

Expected Results:  should not be present

Additional info:

Comment 1 Mihai Ibanescu 2003-11-19 00:20:42 UTC
Not exactly an rhn problem.

Comment 2 Tim Powers 2003-12-08 20:00:47 UTC
Not exactly a compose problem either since the ES packages are
identical to the AS packages aside from redhat-release, comps, and
anaconda-product.

Tim

Comment 3 Tim Powers 2003-12-08 20:39:02 UTC
Reassigning to dff since he likes these types of problems.

Comment 4 dff 2003-12-11 21:03:13 UTC
I misread this bug the first time around.

RHEL 3 _should_ have all of the kernel packages in all variants.  The
"enforcing" of SLA policies is done by the new redhat-support-check
utility in initscripts, not by witholding packages.

This is different from RHEL 2.1, where we took the approach of
witholding kernel-enterprise,kernel-summit from ES and kernel-summit
from WS.

So, not a bug.

Interestingly, the bug that I originally thought this was reporting
(that the kernel-enterprise and kernel-summit packages had crept back
into the RHEL 2.1 ES, WS channels) actually does exist.  *sigh*