Description of problem: Subscription Manager is being updated to allow the user to specify a hostname for an on-site subscription service to register against. However the various servers all use different prefixes for the web application, which the user is not likely to know. (i.e. /subscription, /katello/api, /headpin/api) We would like to standardize on /subscription being the definitive web app prefix across all our products that subscription manager hits. Ivan's proposed solution is via apache configuration: https://www.redhat.com/archives/katello-devel/2012-May/msg00028.html
So is my understanding correct; rhsm will ship with /subscription by default. We should still change the prefix for old clients, right?
Any properly configured old client should still be fine, as the previous API URL would still exist. The new redirect would be a default for all new clients, but again can be configured in the rhsm.conf file, or using the new gui/cli tools for selecting a server, port, and webapp prefix.
https://github.com/Katello/katello/pull/595
Can be tested by using rhsm.conf prefix of /subscriptions. i.e. register with subscription-manager-gui, specify the katello server by IP or hostname only (it will default to /subscriptions) Or specify katellohostname:port/subscriptions registration should work, system should appear in katello.
Mistake in my previous comment and the title of this but, it's "subscription", not the plural "subscriptions".
Verified in revision: katello-glue-candlepin-1.1.12-12.el6cf.noarch katello-candlepin-cert-key-pair-1.0-1.noarch katello-cli-1.1.8-6.el6cf.noarch katello-configure-1.1.9-6.el6cf.noarch katello-1.1.12-12.el6cf.noarch katello-qpid-client-key-pair-1.0-1.noarch katello-certs-tools-1.1.8-1.el6cf.noarch katello-glue-pulp-1.1.12-12.el6cf.noarch katello-selinux-1.1.1-1.el6cf.noarch katello-qpid-broker-key-pair-1.0-1.noarch katello-cli-common-1.1.8-6.el6cf.noarch katello-common-1.1.12-12.el6cf.noarch katello-agent-1.1.2-1.el6cf.noarch Server prefix "/subscription" works OK and it registers system.
Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2012-1543.html