On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 10:37:49AM -0700, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> On 12/11/20 5:04 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > On 12/12/20 12:12 AM, Troy Dawson wrote:
> > > There is also a problem if a missing package has been specifically
> > > blocked by a module. I think libuv-devel is this way.
> >
> > If that happens, wouldn't it be blocked in both scenarios
> > (module+grobisplitter+tagging and devel-only-component)? Or would
> > grobisplitter put them in an additional repo with module_hotfixes=yes?
> >
> > If that's the case, it might be possible to create a separate repo with
> > such packages only and manually tag them there. E.g. after a build I'd
> > do `koji tag epel8-buildroot-module-hotfixes foo-devel-1.6-5.el8` and
> > the epel8-buildroot-module-hotfixes repo would be available from EPEL 8
> > Koji/mock builds with module_hotfixes=yes. Yes, unlike the rest of this
> > proposal, it requires some work (on infra to set up this extra repo and
> > on packagers to remember to do the tagging, but that still sounds like
> > less work than the grobisplitter proposal for both groups).
>
> Is there any easy way to tell if a package is explicitly blocked vs just not
> being present.
You can ask koji:
koji list-pkgs --show-blocked --package whatever
and it will tell you what tags it's blocked in with [BLOCKED]
kevin
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
