On 06.08.2007 16:04, Jeff Sheltren wrote:
On Jul 27, 2007, at 8:48 AM, Michael DeHaan wrote:
I haven't looked at these packages yet, but I'm really glad to see this work being done. I mentioned this on #epel a few days ago -- lots of folks will be looking for yum to be there.
The selfish reason for me to want it is that Cobbler (http:// cobbler.et.redhat.com) uses it for repository management and is otherwise broken in EPEL (http://cobbler.et.redhat.com) -- the not so selfish reason is tons of RHEL4 users are already using yum for various things (including maintaining their own repositories of lots of stuff, including, sometimes, updates) and it would be nice if they could get their yum from EPEL and use yum with EPEL if they wanted.
During the EPEL meeting on July 25 -- log here: https://www.redhat.com/archives/epel-devel-list/2007-July/msg00225.html There was some discussion about problems including yum in EPEL.
The first issue was that these packages don't mess up CentOS users. Since these packages all have a lower release than those found in CentOS, that should not be a problem since they should never get installed in the first place.
+1
The second issue was that RHEL 4 users can't use yum for system updates.
Or install packages from EPEL that require deps from RHEL4, as long as they don't set up their own RHEL-repo (see the other mails from dag on this topic).
Do we need to provide a wiki page explaining to RHEL users that yum is available only to fill dependencies and shouldn't be used directly? What are people's thoughts on this -- especially those that use RHEL? Is it confusing to have yum if RHEL can't use it to do system updates?
My preferred solution: add a patch that makes yum *on RHEL only* display a warning like "you should use up2date on RHEL4 to install packages from EPEL or update RHEL itself" and add a config option to disabled that warning for those that use mrepo to set up a RHEL-updates repo.
I'd like to get this discussed here on the list
List is preferred for such discussions, as it's IMHO to time consuming to discuss all details in a IRC meeting if they havened been discussed on the list yet -- if they have and no consensus could be found then it's in my experience easier to come to an agreement in a IRC meeting.
so that we can make a decision about it at the next EPEL meeting if needed.
+1 -- it's still on the schedule.
Cu knurd