dep checker script

Stephen Smoogen smooge at
Sun Feb 3 19:44:57 UTC 2008

Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> On 03.02.2008 19:42, Stephen Smoogen wrote:
>> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>>> On 03.02.2008 18:52, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>>>> On Feb 3, 2008 7:37 AM, Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora at> wrote:
>>>> 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.
> Ahh, k, didn't know that. Thx for letting me/us know.

I think it was brought a couple of times a loooong time ago.. but its 
been over a year since I remember.

>>>> 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 
>> towards it.

I could have added some words to that line. I meant it as:

It is my hope that EPEL/CentOS communities will be able to work better 
together as there are more CentOS boxes than RHEL boxes. I can't say 
that it will happen, but I will at least make sure that our differences 
are easier for people to know about.

> I actually some weeks ago looked once what's in CentOS extras that's not
> yet in EPEL. The xfce desktop environment is still missing in EPEL, but
> nirik is planing to build it iirc (the CentOS extras package are
> rebuilds of the Fedora packages). Mono is also not completely in EPEL,
> but Xavier has started with it iirc.
> Note that if EPEL really wants to be suitable for both RHEL and CentOS
> without causing to many broken deps problems EPEL need to invent some
> tricks (two repos?) in the long run afaics, as sometimes stuff hits RHEL
> a bit earlier then CentOS. That has consequences for CentOS&EPEL users
> if a EPEL packages depends on the new stuff; the quarterly updates (does
> anybody have a better name for them; they are not quarterly...) are the
> big (only?) problem area here afaics.

"When they get to them" updates. Black Someday is what I know two places 
have called it when they start getting pages that various desktops 
started auto-updating and the network is full.

More information about the epel-devel-list mailing list