[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [Rdo-list] Missing python-httplib2 package in RDO?

On 06/15/2013 03:31 PM, "François Cami" wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Steve Gordon <sgordon redhat com> wrote:
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Dave Neary" <dneary redhat com>
>>> To: "Steve Gordon" <sgordon redhat com>
>>> Cc: rdo-list redhat com
>>> Sent: Friday, June 14, 2013 7:27:23 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [Rdo-list] Missing python-httplib2 package in RDO?
>>> Hi,
>>> Yes, EPEL is required. It was in the initial install instructions, and I
>>> seem to recall a discussion about how installing the repo file enabled EPEL.
>>> Pádraig, am I mis-remembering?
>>> Thanks,
>>> Dave.
>> As Alan alluded to on the bug packstack should, and probably is, enabling EPEL by default on EL6-based distributions (will do a run later today to confirm hopefully). I suspect the user in question had installed the RDO release RPM and was following the manual installation path, we probably need a note somewhere to highlight that EPEL is assumed/required in this case?


> What about adding
> Requires: epel-release
> to rdo-release.spec?
> We could even put the epel-release rpm in the rdo repository to make
> things simpler.

Though a little less flexible. packstack is used to manage this dependency
at a higher level, allowing the RDO repo to be used without EPEL if desired.
Though that's not the common case. Also the edge case of avoiding EPEL is
handled with yum --disablerepo=epel ...
So this is a good suggestion and would avoid docs.
However this may involve a little packstack work to handle an EPEL repo
that was now installed by default.
I've logged https://bugzilla.redhat.com/974971 to discuss that.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]