Overlap policy v20120615

[Paul Howarth]

On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 17:04:32 -0600
Kevin Fenzi <kevin at scrye.com> wrote:

> On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 16:51:46 +0100
> "Richard W.M. Jones" <rjones at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > Kevin, about the provision to provide packages for other binary
> > architectures.
> > 
> > RHEL 6 supplies qemu-kvm only on x86-64.  This provision lets us
> > provide qemu-kvm on i386 and ppc64 I think.
> 
> Yeah. 
> 
> The exact policy is: 
> 
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL:Packaging#Limited_Arch_Packages
> 
> > My questions:
> > 
> > Does it have to be the same n-v-r of qemu-kvm?  (This seems like it
> > would be impossible in practice, so I guess the answer must be no)
> 
> No, it needs to be less than the one provided by RHEL. 
> 
> ie, a leading 0 on the release... 
> 
> > Can the other arches be provided by a differently named package?
> > (We call it 'qemu' in Fedora)
> 
> I don't know. It would complicate things on versions, etc. 
> 
> > Can the EPEL package override the x86-64 package from RHEL, eg. by
> > providing qemu-kvm.x86-64 with a higher n-v-r?  Or should the EPEL
> > package ExcludeArch the RHEL packages that exist?
> 
> The EPEL version should be a lower n-v-r than the RHEL one. 
> However, due to the way koji works, when we setup a package like this,
> it's the EPEL version on all arches that is seen/used in the
> buildsystem. There's no way to tell koji to block a package in only
> one arch or look for it in only some other ones. 

So koji has no support for yum's "cost" parameter then? Assigning a
"cost" of more than 1000 to EPEL would get yum to prefer other repos
(e.g. RHEL) to it when there were packages of equal NEVR in multiple
places.

Paul.