Le 05/03/2025 à 14:58, Sérgio Basto via epel-devel a écrit :
On Wed, 2025-03-05 at 13:47 +0100, Remi Collet wrote:
Le 21/02/2025 à 07:20, Remi Collet a écrit :
AFAIK, $releasever is 10 by default.
I maybe I'm seeing this wrong , but $releasever is 10 and repo will
have packages distag 10_1 , or $releasever is 10.0 and packages in the
repo will have distag 10_0 only
Don't understand this sentence....
To be clear (or try to)
By default (CentOS Stream, RHEL, Alma....)
* releaserver set to 10
* releaserver_major set to 10
* releaserver_minor not set
So will pull from "10" repository (which is really "10.1" for EPEL)
If forced to 10.0
* releaserver set to 10.0
* releaserver_major set to 10
* releaserver_minor set to 0
Then will pull from "10.0" repository (until forced to another value)
no need $releasever_major and $releasever_minor values
epel.repo uses
metalink=https://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/metalink?repo=epel-$releasever_major${releasever_minor:+.$releasever_minor}&arch=$basearch
$releasever_major${releasever_minor:+.$releasever_minor} which is
exactly the same than $releasever (so not useful and less legible)
But $releasever_major can be useful, ex
gpgkey=file:///etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-EPEL-$releasever_major
Remi
Confirmed on both RHEL-10.0-Beta and AlmaLinux-10.0-Beta
https://forums.almalinux.org/t/bug-epel-repo-missing-releasever-major-and-releasever-minor-values/5566/3?u=remi
Sorry, but I think EPEL-10 is broken by design
--
_______________________________________________
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
