so to be clear, the request is to add

PRETTY_FAMILY_NAME="Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7"

(or something like that) to all the redhat-release packages.

See bug 911553 for the original problem and workaround and bug 1306543 for where that workaround proved inadequate.

Copy-n-paste from bug 1306543

PRETTY_FAMILY_NAME sounds good.

The problem I see is that
FAMILY_NAME and PRETTY_FAMILY_NAME are not covered by the upstream spec:
https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/os-release.html

Maybe we should have a complete story around this, as in:
What do we need to differentiate, and why isn't NAME enough?
How is NAME different from FAMILY_NAME?
What is the difference between PRETTY_NAME and PRETTY_FAMILY_NAME?

Is teh story that FAMILY is something like the product family, and NAME referring to the specific product in a family, i.e.:

Family: RHEL
Name: RHEL Atomic Host

Family: RHEV
Name: RHEV Hypervisor

Family: Fedora
Name: Fedora
Family: CentOS
Name: CentOS
^^ This is awkward

Family: Fedora
Name: Workstation
^^ Makes more sense

Specififc examples:

= RHEV =
FAMILY="Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization"
NAME="Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization Hypervisor"
VARIANT="Hypervisor"
PRETTY_NAME="Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization Hypervisor 4.0"
PRETTY_FAMILY="Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization 4.0"
ID="rhel"
VARIANT_ID="ovirt-node"
VERSION_ID="7.2"     <- We keep RHEL's version, but use RHEV's version in PRETTY

= Atomic =
FAMILY="Red Hat Enterprise Linux"
NAME="Red Hat Enterprise Linux Atomic Host"
VARIANT="Atomic Host"
PRETTY_NAME="Red Hat Enterprise Linux Atomic Host 7.2"
PRETTY_FAMILY="Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7.2"
ID="rhel"
VARIANT_ID="atomic-host"
VERSION_ID="7.2"

= Fedora =
NAME="oVirt Node"
FAMILY="oVirt"
VARIANT="Node"
PRETTY_NAME="oVirt Node 4.0"
PRETTY_FAMILY="oVirt 4.0"
ID="rhel"
VARIANT="ovirt-node"
VERSION_ID="7.2"     <- We keep RHEL's version, but use RHEV's version in PRETTY


In the end I am not sure if we benefit from this.

Thoughts?

Hello team,

I do agree, if we involve some custom fields that only Red Hat ships, we'll diverge even more from upstream.

Closing as WON'T FIX unless there would be part of systemd documentation. Feel free to reopen bug and move it to systemd.

Otherwise I generally agree about the idea, but would use bit different methodology

Layered Product/Base product which is what we use in PDC, Productmd ...

Lubos