On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 02:06:43PM +0200, Miro Hron=C4=8Dok wrote:
On 07. 07. 20 14:08, Tomas Orsava wrote:
On 6/30/20 9:10 PM, Miro Hron=C4=8Dok wrote:
On 30. 06. 20 21:03, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
I don't think a package-review is needed? It would just be unretiri=
ng
the fedora branches of an existing package?
=20 Technically, the package is "retired for 8+ weeks" on Fedora. Hence a new review request. =20
That said, I am -1 on the idea. =20 You have no idea how many people try to install epel packages on fe=
dora.
We had to explicitly add a Conflicts to try and reduce this, and th=
at
was with them in another repo entirely! =20 I fear if we do this more people will start installing stuff from e=
pel
on fedora and cause a lot of breakage.
=20 I understand the concern, but am not considering it a blocker for this, especially since people will find a way to download the epel packages anyway. This does not allow `dnf install epel-release` on Fedora neither are the repos enabled. The amount of work to actually use this package to install epel packages on Fedora is more or less the same as downloading the packages from Koji or EPEL mirrors.
=20 =20 +1 from me. People will always do weird things, if they want rope, I sa=
y
let them have it. But that shouldn't stop us from making life easier for packagers. I myself would use this.
=20 The discussion kinda stopped. I don't want to force the package in, but I=
'd
like to have some resolution. Is there a better way to achieve the result=
s
with less risk?
Well, not sure. Is there some way to put the repo files in a doc space or something and only get repoquery to use them, not normal dnf commands? I can't think of how to make it work, but perhaps dnf people could? could we request a special /etc/dnf/repoquery.d/ dir or something?
Failing that, can they at least have a big comment block explaining that you shouldn't use them to install any packages with?
kevin
On 21. 07. 20 22:14, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Well, not sure. Is there some way to put the repo files in a doc space or something and only get repoquery to use them, not normal dnf commands? I can't think of how to make it work, but perhaps dnf people could? could we request a special/etc/dnf/repoquery.d/ dir or something?
I could not find anything remotely like this in dnf documentation. I can possibly open and RFE, but given how the dnf devs are swamped I don't think it would be realistic to expect this to land any time soon.
Failing that, can they at least have a big comment block explaining that you shouldn't use them to install any packages with?
Can do. I can even put that into the package descriptions.
Is there a better way to achieve the results with less risk?
What I do for this is run podman containers. I create local images of centos+epel, then use a helper script to run them with a podman volume mounted at /var/cache/{yum,dnf}. With my script I can run repoquery commands prefixed by a distro identifier.
c7 repoquery --whatprovides webserver
This also has the benefit of being able to start a container interactively, install packages, and then throw it away when you're done, with zero risk of installing packages on the host. If this approach is interesting to you I can put my scripts in a public repo somewhere.
On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 3:34 PM Miro Hrončok mhroncok@redhat.com wrote:
On 21. 07. 20 22:14, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Well, not sure. Is there some way to put the repo files in a doc space or something and only get repoquery to use them, not normal dnf commands? I can't think of how to make it work, but perhaps dnf people could? could we request a special/etc/dnf/repoquery.d/ dir or something?
I could not find anything remotely like this in dnf documentation. I can possibly open and RFE, but given how the dnf devs are swamped I don't think it would be realistic to expect this to land any time soon.
Failing that, can they at least have a big comment block explaining that you shouldn't use them to install any packages with?
Can do. I can even put that into the package descriptions.
-- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok _______________________________________________ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject...
On 24. 07. 20 19:05, Carl George wrote:
Is there a better way to achieve the results with less risk?
What I do for this is run podman containers. I create local images of centos+epel, then use a helper script to run them with a podman volume mounted at/var/cache/{yum,dnf}. With my script I can run repoquery commands prefixed by a distro identifier.
c7 repoquery --whatprovides webserver
This also has the benefit of being able to start a container interactively, install packages, and then throw it away when you're done, with zero risk of installing packages on the host. If this approach is interesting to you I can put my scripts in a public repo somewhere.
This is certainly interesting when you actually want to install packages, but for repoqueries, I find it a bit overkill.
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Carl George -
Kevin Fenzi -
Miro Hrončok