Carl,
it looks like this will not be included in centos stream per RH. so
looks like option 2 or 3 would be next right? to help the greater
community 3 might be better since other agents are missing too.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2098360
On 2022-06-17 16:28, Carl George wrote:
On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 8:31 AM Alex Talaran <atala...@gmail.com> wrote:
would anyone be willing to package this in epel or help get it in the
existing package please?
i asked on bugzilla [1] but the current maintainer isnt able to help at
the moment. from what i can tell it might just need uncommented in the
spec file [2]. someone else asked about it [1][3] and the ownership is
being thrown back and forth between epel and rhel.
[1]
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2029251
[2]
https://github.com/ClusterLabs/fence-agents/blob/main/fence-agents.spec.in#L33
[3]
https://github.com/ClusterLabs/fence-agents/issues/456
_______________________________________________
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
In Fedora fence-agents-pve is a subpackage of fence-agents.
fence-agents is in RHEL, so the Fedora package cannot be branched
as-is for EPEL. Some possible alternatives:
- Open a CentOS Stream bugzilla and request that fence-agents-pve be
added to the fence-agents spec file. If the maintainer agrees, it
will show up in the next RHEL minor release ("next" being contingent
on timing). This is the ideal solution from a packaging perspective
but has a fair chance of being declined if RHEL doesn't want to
ship/support that subpackage.
- Create a stand-alone fence-agents-pve package, and get it reviewed
as an EPEL-only package. That would be allowed in EPEL because
neither the srpm or rpm name would conflict with RHEL.
- Create a fence-agents-epel package that contains all the subpackages
that are disabled in the RHEL spec file. Similar to the previous
option, this would be EPEL-only and would be allowed because the srpm
and rpm names don't conflict with RHEL.
- Rebuild the Fedora spec file with all subpackages somewhere where
replacing base packages is allowed, such as a copr or a CentOS SIG.
_______________________________________________
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
