Le 22/11/2021 à 15:52, Carl George a écrit :
On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 8:11 AM Miro Hrončok
<mhroncok(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> On 22. 11. 21 15:00, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
>> - builds will require a valid Red Hat subscription (the no-cost
>> variant is
>> OK as well, though [2])
> I cannot help myself but I consider this very unpleasant for EPEL
> packagers.
>
> Getting and configuring the subscription was always so unfriendly for
> me that
> I've been using EPEL mocks even for my RHEL work. This basically
> means using
> EPEL mocks will once again be as complicated as using RHEL.
>
> However, enough of my personal views. Since we have not used RHEL for
> copr/mock
> EPEL buidlroots until now, but we used a downstream freely-available
> RHEL-copy
> (CentOS Linux), could we not continue doing so by using e.g. AlmaLinux?
>
> --
> Miro Hrončok
> --
> Phone: +420777974800
> IRC: mhroncok
> _______________________________________________
>
>
> I'm not aware of a RHEL clone that offers all the architectures that
> EPEL does. As far as I can tell, the three most popular (Alma, Rocky,
> Oracle) only offer x86_64 and aarch64 but are missing ppc64le and
> s390x. That said CentOS Linux 8 doesn't offer s390x either, so we
> already have this problem, but switch the EPEL mock chroot to one of
> those clones would make the situation worse by also dropping ppc64le.
>
The success of COPR is based on it's easy way to build packages,
especially for EPEL,
do whatever you want guys but please at the end, try to not choose the
bullshito way.