On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 09:35:40PM +0200, Leon Fauster wrote:
> On 11.05.21 14:02, Christoph Karl wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > On 11.05.21 at 12:30 Leon Fauster wrote:
> > > While reading this I noticed that the recent fluidsynth-libs update
> > > also introduced a soname bump. Affected EPEL packages
> > > - audacious-plugins-amidi
> > > - qsynth
> >
> > Yes, this was me. I am already trying to clean up this.
> >
>
>
> BTW: As also stated here:
>
> https://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2021-May/076864.html
>
> previous releases (multiple) are not kept but I was assuming that its
> possible to downgrade at least to ONE version before but it isn't.
>
> - Was there ever a downgrade option in EPEL?
no.
> CentOS Stream suffered from that but covered yet:
>
> https://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2021-May/076839.html
>
> Would it not be beneficially? Especially for such cases like these ...
There's a number of reasons we haven't implemented this over the years:
tooling isn't setup for it easily, desire to not keep publishing
insecure/broken/vulnerable packages, etc. We could revist it again, but
it's not something that would change quickly.
CentOS Stream 8 can have major changes, with little warning of those changes. An example is qt5 was recently updated to qt5-5.15, from 5.12.
If they hadn't implemented the backup stuff before that, all new KDE users would be stuck.
So, CentOS Stream has very good motivation to make that change to their repo.
EPEL is supposed to be stable. With things like what happened on this thread, being the exception, instead of the rule.
We do realize that at each RHEL minor release, things can change, and because of that we archive/backup when this happens. So, in one sense, we do have a backup, just not an active backup. It's more like a six month snapshot.
Summary: EPEL and CentOS Stream have different release cadence and policies.
Troy