On Thu, 21 Feb 2013 22:43:50 -0600 inode0 inode0@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 6:24 PM, Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com wrote:
I've now marked these dead.package and blocked them in epel6.
This bz has been sitting around for over 4 months now and is the only obvious remaining case where an epel package stomps on a base RHEL6 package - perhaps someone can clean it up now too?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=867669
The following packages in epel currently have the same version as the same package in RHEL6 which can and does cause issues when the RHEL6 package isn't installed already. New installs and dependencies pull in the epel versions in a "defaultish" configuration. I don't see what purpose they really serve being in epel so if some of them can be removed that would be swell too.
a2ps emacs-a2ps emacs-a2ps-el html2ps libart_lgpl lzop perl-B-Keywords perl-Class-Accessor perl-Class-Data-Inheritable perl-Class-Trigger perl-Devel-Cycle perl-Email-Date-Format perl-Exception-Class perl-File-Copy-Recursive perl-Font-AFM perl-HTML-Format perl-Locale-PO perl-MIME-Lite perl-MIME-Types perl-Module-Find perl-Net-SMTP-SSL perl-PadWalker perl-Perl-Critic perl-Pod-Spell perl-String-Format perl-Syntax-Highlight-Engine-Kate perl-Test-Memory-Cycle perl-Test-Perl-Critic perl-UNIVERSAL-can perl-UNIVERSAL-isa perl-XML-TokeParser perl-XML-Writer ruby-shadow scons xhtml2ps
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'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.
Paul.