On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 9:03 AM, Craig White <craigwhite@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I would guess that terming rpmforge as 'volatile' would depend upon who > you ask - I doubt Dag would agree. I tend to think of rpmforge as > necessary for running CentOS/RHEL servers and think of EPEL as more > 'volatile' Sorry, I didn't actually say rpmforge is volatile. To clarify: EPEL requires that packages have consistent configuration and abi compatibility. This is a core requirement for inclusion into EPEL. Given that clamav is a constantly moving target, maybe EPEL isn't the best place for it. We do, however, have good packages for clamav from rpmforge. Obviously these packages are updated frequently, and don't have the configuration and abi compatibility required for EPEL. My comment regarding having a repo like debian volatile was to provide a repo for RHEL/CentOS users which contains packages which don't guarantee the required compatability. Which is basically what the clamav packages on rpmforge provide. Or we could let epel orphan clamav in EPEL6 and just use rpmforge... Dan -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
