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

Re: 6.4 overlaps

Once upon a time, Paul Howarth <paul city-fan org> said:
> Several of those perl packages are mine, dating back to the RHEL 6
> beta, when we needed them for full arch support. What we did at the
> time was to rebuild the exact same package as RHEL to put in EPEL. I
> appreciate that that's not current policy and we'll do it differently
> for EPEL-7.

I think it is still current policy; as another follow-up to that package
list said, it needed to be checked for exactly what you said.

> I'm sure I've suggested this before but I don't see why the
> epel-release package can't add a "cost" of >1000 (e.g. 1001) to the
> epel repos so that identical packages would always be picked up from
> RHEL in preference to EPEL.

That should be looked at as well, but there's no point in maintaining a
package in EPEL that won't ever be used.
Chris Adams <cmadams hiwaay net>
Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services
I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.

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