EPEL, RHEL-5Server and RHEL-5Client

Stephen John Smoogen smooge at gmail.com
Thu Jul 12 21:18:46 UTC 2007

On 7/12/07, Russell Harrison <rtlm10 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/12/07, Ray Van Dolson <rayvd at bludgeon.org> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 03:34:04PM -0400, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote:
> > >  On 7/12/07, Ray Van Dolson <rayvd at bludgeon.org> wrote:
> > > > Would there be any problem with just replacing the EPEL version in the
> > > > EPEL repo with the upstream version if upstream decides to include a
> > > > conflicting package all of the sudden?
> > >
> > >  Well, how about we ask upstream to use EPEL repositories, just like RH
> > >  does with Fedora? Huh? Huh?
> >
> > +1
> >
> > I imagine there'd still be cases where they went off and decided to do
> > their own thing though, so maybe we should still decide how to handle
> > that.
> Does it make things any easier to have Client / Server repos that
> packages get moved to only when this sort of thing happens?  By
> default all packages go into the current "common" repo and when
> problems like this arise the move to the specific repo.  At least in
> that case it isn't necessary to duplicate everything in both repos.
> Only the one offs.
> Its messy no matter how you do it. :-/

Trying to build against the way 5 is set up is very hard.. I just have
been using CentOS and then dealing with unavailabel packages by adding
in the CentOS items.

Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator
How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed
in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice"

More information about the epel-devel-list mailing list