As far as I know, Fedora is not going to accept more than one spec file to a single package (I'm going to ask). I'm in contact with Rakesh Pandit, the guy who takes care of ntop in Fedora and seeing if we can put it to work for EPEL6 -- Henrique "LonelySpooky" Junior http://about.me/henriquejunior
>________________________________ > From: Volker Fröhlich <volke...@gmx.at> >To: Nico Kadel-Garcia <nka...@gmail.com> >Cc: Henrique Junior <henrique...@gmail.com>; Scientific Linux Users ><scientific-linux-us...@fnal.gov> >Sent: Friday, September 14, 2012 7:54 AM >Subject: Re: ntop for EL6 > >On Fri, 2012-09-14 at 06:42 -0400, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 7:20 PM, Henrique Junior <henrique...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > Hello, Volker >> > I'm already a Fedora packager (not an experient one) and I'd love to put >> > ntop in EPEL (it is in EPEL for EL5). The problem in maintain ntop in EPEL6 >> > is that Fedora now uses systemd to manage our services instead of sysv. It >> > is a Fedora policy to keep only one spec file and that spec is not >> > compatible with EL6 anymore. That is why I believe that RPMForge is the >> > better option. >> > I'm open to ideas to make this package as useful as possible. >> >> RHEL 6 still uses primarily init scripts. Fedora 17 or later, however, >> uses systemd, and the disparity is going to become more of a problem >> for EPEL and Repoforge package maintainers. We're going to have to >> publish two startup files, and install based on which OS is selected. >> >> I'm facing similar work with Subversion and the svnserve init script. > >I'd say RHEL 6 uses them exclusively. Since there's a stable policy for >EPEL, you can only do bugfixes anyway. It does of course involve some >work to switch the current Fedora package to work in EPEL 6, but that's >about it. I suggest to use a separate spec file for the EPEL 6 branch. >Nothing forbids that. > >Volker > > > >
