CentOS, CentOSPlus, and MySQL versions shipping there

Peter posted that CentOS comes with a build of MySQL Enterprise. It should really be clarified that CentOS itself, comes with MySQL Community, as does Red Hat Enterprise Linux. On RHEL5/CentOS5, you’ll see:


The above are the default packages that CentOS provides. However, what Peter really is referring to is the CentOSPlus Repository, which by their own admittance is “not part of the upstream distribution and extend CentOS’s functionality at the expense of upstream compatibility. Enabling this repository makes CentOS different from upstream.”

The idea behind providing Enterprise builds, largely came from RHBZ#230412: No src.rpm available for mysql. Red Hat provides something called the Web Application Stacks product (RHWAS), in where they include MySQL Enterprise, amongst other software packages, and they charge for support (that differs from buying just a RHEL license). Max Spevack answers it pretty well, as this is the response he came to, after talking to folk at MySQL.

Its worth noting that CentOSPlus does not use Enterprise tarballs/SRPMS, but use sources from the BitKeeper tree. Its worth noting, that at the time of this writing, CentOSPlus does not include Enterprise RPMs for CentOS 5, just CentOS 4. Its also worth noting that patches are being applied, that are out of tree, to the RPMs. A snippet from the RPM changelog (rpm -q --changelog <packagename> if you must):

* Mon Dec 24 2007 Johnny Hughes <johnny@centos.org> 5.0.54-1.el4.centos
- upgraded to the 5.0.54 Enterprise BK tree. Removed patches that are
already incorporated into 5.0.54.

- added mysql-5.0.52-mysqldump-hang-33057.patch for mysql bug #33057

- added mysql-5.0.50-openssl-handshake-33050.patch fo mysql bug #33050

* Sun Dec 23 2007 Johnny Hughes <johnny@centos.org> 5.0.48-3.el4.centos
- modified the process of obtaining the Enterprise Sources to using bkf and
downloading directly from the MySQL Enterprise BitKeeper tree.

So, definitely interesting times. If you hit a bug, you might be wondering if its an upstream bug, or something that was provided by your packager. Of course, this is what is so great about the MySQL community – the ability to do just this! Currently, against 5.0.54, CentOSPlus is shipping 2 patches, with a few extra source packages that don’t come with regular tarballs. Will this number grow? Just remember, the “Enterprise” version you get in CentOSPlus is not “MySQL Enterprise”.

Technorati Tags: , , ,


  1. Hi Colin,

    Just wanted to add some more info here w.r.t the CentOS / MySQL rpms in CentOSPlus.

    Firstly, I will be making available the newer MySQL builds in CentOS-5 within the next day or so ( keep an eye out for announcements ) – That should resolve the issue of these packages not being available on CentOS-5 as yet. We have had a fair few people ask for them already.

    Secondly, I am quite interested in working out what the differences are in the MySQL Enterprise builds and what we provide in the CentOSPlus repositories. Where should I start looking ? Has anyone does a feature or capability comparison as yet ?


    You guys said that the bit keeper trees ARE mysql enterprise, now they are not????

    So now my version, which has your tagged 5.0.54 and a couple patches FROM your bitkeeper tree to fix bugs that should have NEVER got out the door.


  3. byte says:

    Hi Johnny,

    The tarballs themselves, aren’t going to be available, not in the near future anyway.

    The BitKeeper trees are MySQL. Enterprise and Community. Your version is a tag + some patches that are out of tree (as in not within that tag), so they are essentially *different*, no?

    So, taking say, 5.0.54 and adding patches from bitkeeper, no matter what tag you pull it from, does not make it upstream 5.0.54, does it? Of course not, its now upstream + patches.

    Thats what I was trying to explain, months ago…

  4. byte says:

    Hi Karanbir,

    Its good to know there will be CentOS 5 packages available soon, in centosplus.

    The MySQL Enterprise builds you provide, if based on an Enterprise tag, with no patches, will be exactly the same as what MySQL provides. The moment you add patches, naturally it is not the same any longer.

    Is there a feature/capability comparison? No. There are changelogs online, but thats about it.

  5. well … what I meant to really say was that the tagged version did not compile on centos-4 and pass all the tests without the couple patches that are added. In fact, they would not have compiled on RHEL-4 or CentOS-4 without those patches. I wonder how they were released with out them?

    Also the other sources that you mention are caused because MySQL does not provide DOCS in the bitkeeper tree.

  6. byte says:

    Hmm, that is truly odd, that the tagged releases did not build on RHEL-4, seeing that we release packages for that very same platform. I’ll put this down on my copious todo list to investigate, thanks for the information