dep checker script
smooge at gmail.com
Sun Feb 3 18:42:25 UTC 2008
Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> On 03.02.2008 18:52, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>> On Feb 3, 2008 7:37 AM, Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora at leemhuis.info> wrote:
>>>> whether to run against CentOS or the private RHEL repos
>>> I'd prefer the private RHEL repos if that's possible without to much
>>> trouble. CentOS would be fine as well, but there are small differences
>>> (no PPC (yet) for example; small delay with updates, new releases)
>> Well how many people have PPC :)?
> No idea :)
>> Actually I was going to look at testing against both.
> Yeah, might be a good idea.
>> This allows us
>> to catch items where CentOS has something and RHEL doesn't..
> Well, no offense, but that's afaics would be a bug in CentOS, as they
> aim to be compatible.
Uhm no. Red Hat does not always ship various -devel and some other
packages when a package was built. CentOS also has made sure that you
get everything that would have come from a package so that you could use
it to do other development. This was a big problem in 2/3 and a bit in
4. I think 5 may not have had this issue.
>> and if
>> something conflicts with the CentOS 'extras' repo so that problems can
>> be managed correctly.
> Good idea.
> But on the other hand: the repotag wars were now nearly a year ago and
> one of the bad guys (/me) leaves soon. Maybe we could somehow come over
> it and make peace with the CentOS guys and work together in a better way
> that works better for both sides? That was my and afaics everybody's
> else plan when we started EPEL, but didn't happen due some
> mis-communication and misunderstandings (that's the short story and I
> blame myself for a few of those issues that lead to the current
> situation) in the initial EPEL start phase.
That is my hope. I can't say that it will happen, but I will work
More information about the epel-devel-list