On 06/15/2012 03:27 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 12:43:52 -0500
inode0 <inode0(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> No, I don't want them dropped from the build system. I want to know
> why piranha can't be packaged by EPEL for example?
We added those channels to the buildsystem due to maintainer requests.
I think back when RHEL was in beta we had at least 2-3 maintainers say
that they wished to build $foo for EPEL6, but it needed $bar, which was
already in one of {ha|lb}, so could we please add them?
I think it's just mostly history at this point.
If we wanted to try and untangle them and drop them from the
buildsystem, would that make policy making better/more sane/more clear?
I'd like to see what packages that might affect.
ha has 41 packages in it.
lb has only 2.
Could we get a list of these packages? Or find out where you can get a
list?
The following epel packages require packages in those 2 repos:
plplot-devel-0:5.9.7-3.el6.1
Hmm, I can install all plplot packages on my base entitlement rhel6 +
optional box so this strikes me as false positive. More overlaps
between channels?
Any way to ask yum to install all packages from a specific repo while
still having all repos enabled? Might be interesting to see the output
of something like:
yum install <all of epel>
on a base rhel6 box.
--
Orion Poplawski
Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222
NWRA/CoRA Division FAX: 303-415-9702
3380 Mitchell Lane orion(a)cora.nwra.com
Boulder, CO 80301
http://www.cora.nwra.com