So, I'm not going to answer all the (verbose) replies in this thread point by point. ;)
I looked up what exactly we agreed to for policy last year before launching EPEL6, and it was: "EPEL6 will not ship any packages that have src.rpms on public mirrors under 6* directories with the following exception: If the binary rpm is only shipped in some arches in RHEL, EPEL may ship a package as close as possible to the RHEL version with a leading package Release of 0. (ie, libfoo-1.2-0.x) (note that EPEL maintainer must keep up exactly with the RHEL src.rpm where possible)." Cite: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/meetbot/teams/epel/epel.2011-01-03-20.30.html So, under this current policy, glusterfs should sadly be removed from EPEL. I'll note there's a few other packages in that channel that might also cause some problems for other projects: python-greenlet and python-eventlet are used by openstack. pyxattr is used by rdiff-backup and also duplicity. hekafs uses glusterfs. RHUI and DirServ both have a number of conflicting packages too. I fear we are going to have to collect all the SRPMS and see what the effects are here. I also note that the SAM channel has a old puppet/facter version in it. Would anyone care to create a script to collect all these src.rpms and compare against epel? kevin
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ epel-devel-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list
