[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Packages duplicated between EL-5 sub-channels and EPEL



On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 05:21:31PM -0700, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> 
> ================
> found this by first looking for conflicts in packages and then doing a
> reverse walk with
> for i in $( cat file-of-conflicts  ); do repoquery  --disablerepo="*"
> --enablerepo=epel --qf='%{NAME}' --whatrequires $i; done
> 
Wait a minute.... So the first list is conflicts with  with
RHEL layered products.  We're saying, these packages are in our new
definition of RHEL and thereforewe need to drop them.  I'm with you so far.

But why the second list?  If the package is in RHEL, then we need to check
the second list and see if they can build/work with the version in RHEL,
right?  Not outright drop?

-Toshio

Attachment: pgpGJ8lITK7MP.pgp
Description: PGP signature


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]