Greg Swallow wrote: > Jarod Wilson wrote: >> Not a good example. The repo the package is in is listed in the output >> of yum list. >> >> # yum list kernel >> Loading "installonlyn" plugin >> Installed Packages >> kernel.ia64 2.6.20-2.2975.bz231219 installed >> kernel.ia64 2.6.20-1.2966.fc7 installed >> Available Packages >> kernel.ia64 2.6.20-1.2987.fc7 development > > Yes, but if dag and epel had the same package name/version/release (and > no repotag) you might see: > > Available Packages > nagios.i386 2.8-1.el4 dag > nagios.i386 2.8-1.el4 epel > > If a yum upgrade fails while looking for a dependency of nagios, the > output wouldn't tell you if it was the dag or epel package it was trying > to install. True. >> I'm sort of up in the air on this one. Fedora Extras is, er, was, an >> official project endorsed by RH, had no repotag, and EPEL is just an >> extension of this same project. Since its an official repo, it > requires >> no repotag to identify the package. > > That attitude doesn't seem to be conducive to getting everyone to work > together. There would be that. > Remember Dag has been providing "EPEL" packages for years > now. (Thanks Dag!) Yep, I know. Used some of 'em in a previous life on RH7.3 and RHEL3 systems. > And I don't know if the RHEL support department would use the word > "official". Sounds too much like a synonym of "100% safe and fully > supported" maybe ;-) Exactly the point I was making below. >> Of course, Fedora and RHEL are a wee >> bit different, and making the distinction that's easy to see at a > glance >> between core RHEL packages and EPEL-for-RHEL certainly does have some >> merit that it doesn't have (or didn't when Extras was separate) in >> Fedora-land. It would likely be of help to RH support if they could > tell >> if a package was from RHEL-proper or from EPEL without having to look >> anything up... > > Yup, that's a good reason to add a repotag too. However, I believe support typically asks people to get them the output from the sysreport tool, which could be easily modified to add %vendor to the rpm listing it outputs (currently does %n-%v-%r-%arch). -- Jarod Wilson jwilson redhat com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature