On 29/03/15 14:44, Tom H wrote:
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 6:04 AM, John Pilkington j.p...@tesco.net wrote:
On 27/03/15 08:53, Tom H wrote:
Point releases are just a snapshot of the packages at a certain point
in time, like Debian 6.x/7.x and Ubuntu 12.04.x/14.04.x.
RHEL offers its customers an
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Steve Gaarder
gaar...@math.cornell.edu wrote:
In that case, I'm thinking that it could be useful to maintain an EPEL
mirror that does not get updated between TUV's release and the SL release. I
could do that for my own use or it could be a community effort.
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 7:28 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia nka...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 5:59 AM, Tom H tomh0...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com wrote:
The ultimate cause of this issue was an upgrade of glib2 by RedHat in RHEL
On 27/03/15 08:53, Tom H wrote:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 7:28 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia nka...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 5:59 AM, Tom H tomh0...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com wrote:
The ultimate cause of this issue was an
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 9:02 AM, Tim Kanuka tim.kan...@lightsource.ca wrote:
I think having a EPEL mirror in the way described by Steve is an excellent
idea. It exactly parallels my own requirement (and I suppose any site's
requirement) of managing updates to many machines. The only way to
In that case, I'm thinking that it could be useful to maintain an EPEL
mirror that does not get updated between TUV's release and the SL release.
I could do that for my own use or it could be a community effort.
Thoughts?
Steve Gaarder
System Administrator, Dept of Mathematics
Cornell
: owner-scientific-linux-us...@listserv.fnal.gov
[mailto:owner-scientific-linux-us...@listserv.fnal.gov] On Behalf Of Steve
Gaarder
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2015 09:45
To: Akemi Yagi
Cc: SL Users
Subject: Re: SL7x and the 'epel' repo
In that case, I'm thinking that it could be useful to maintain an EPEL
On 03/27/2015 01:39 PM, Steve Gaarder wrote:
It would be very helpful to me if I could have some idea of when SL 7.1
is likely to emerge. That will tell me whether I can just wait or need
to come up with some kind of workaround for the EPEL problem.
thanks,
Steve Gaarder
System Administrator,
On 27/03/15 18:01, Steve Gaarder wrote:
On Fri, 27 Mar 2015, Akemi Yagi wrote:
One thing that is different from EPEL is that ELRepo's el7.1 packages
that are _not_ backward compatible will not install on systems 7.1.
yum will complain. My understanding is that EPEL packages do not have
such
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com wrote:
On 03/19/2015 03:34 AM, John Pilkington wrote:
I had been under the impression that it was likely to be safe to use 'epel'
packages, so, wishing to provide feedback, I installed a new version of
qtwebkit from
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 5:59 AM, Tom H tomh0...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com wrote:
The ultimate cause of this issue was an upgrade of glib2 by RedHat in RHEL
7.1. And because the glib2 library does not use symbol versioning, rpm cannot
On 03/19/2015 03:34 AM, John Pilkington wrote:
I had been under the impression that it was likely to be safe to use 'epel'
packages, so, wishing to provide feedback, I installed a new version of
qtwebkit from epel-testing. No hint of problems during installation, but
programs using it failed.
12 matches
Mail list logo
