To all EPEL packagers
mastahnke at gmail.com
Thu Aug 12 17:42:21 UTC 2010
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 10:38 AM, Michael Schwendt <mschwendt at gmail.com> wrote:
> I've filed lots of -1 in bodhi for EPEL 5, and that doesn't cover all issues.
> Untested packages:
> Apparently, there are packagers, who mark their updates "stable" without
> even having tried to install the packages while they were being offered
> in epel-testing. This affects new packages as well as updates. It gives
> the smell of treating EPEL as just another build target and repo to dump
> builds at. In one case, the packager has admitted he doesn't have an
> installation to test with. At least using a compatible CentOS
> installation on a multi-boot machine ought to be mandatory.
> The RubyGems stack:
> There are several rubygem* (and ruby*) packages, which suffer from
> unresolvable dependencies. Dunno how complete repoclosure is on EL 5
> (e.g. with regard to Obsoletes), but it's available:
> $ sudo yum -y install yum-utils
> $ repoclosure | tee el5-broken-deps.log
> Missing rebuilds:
> At least "libevent" has had a SONAME bump in the base dist.
> Corresponding rebuilds of packages in EPEL 5 are missing.
> epel-devel-list mailing list
> epel-devel-list at redhat.com
Michael, thanks for the filings. We're aware of many of the rubygem
issues, and have bugs opened to fix them.
I was playing with repoclosure a couple nights ago on EPEL and found
quite a few dep issues, and was concerned that I was doing something
wrong with it. Perhaps I wasn't.
EPEL Team -- Should we start planning another bug day? It certainly
is a goal to at least have the stable repo not have dep issues.
More information about the epel-devel-list