Michael E Brown wrote:
I tried it - I had to hunt through the epel testing repo to find a yum/mock that would actually work on rhel4. However, if I can happily use fedora to build el4 packages with mock, then I would rather do that than actually have to run el4 just to build packages.On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 11:29:29PM +0200, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:On 11/20/2007 11:20 PM, Michael E Brown wrote:I have to contradict you here. To my knowledge Centos 4 is quite popular and even though lots of people have switched their devel boxes to C5 or Fedora, those still using C4 need love, too.On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 02:05:46PM -0700, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:Ok I am going to ask the harder question :). How does this affect RHEL-4 and such?Does not affect RHEL4. I dont intend to upgrade mock in RHEL4 at this time, as I dont have a box to test this out on. Nor do I think it worth the effort to do so, as I doubt there are any users (or at least *very* few, if any.)Yes, I know Centos 4 and RHEL4 are popular. My point was that I didnt think that many people actually ran mock on them. I've gotten very little in the way of feedback from people running mock on EL4. The vast majority of people (that I know about) running mock do so on Fedora-<recent>, or RHEL5. As always, there are a very few people who might actually be running mock there, I just havent heard from them.
So with mock 0.8.x, I can build el4 and el5 packages on fedora?
If there is a large contingent of people running mock on EL-4, I would be happy to update mock on EL-4 to latest if there is A) demand, and B) somebody who is willing to test and (possibly) submit patches if there are issues. -- Michael _______________________________________________ epel-devel-list mailing list epel-devel-list redhat com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature