Re: Re: Mixing RPMforge and EPEL (Was: EPEL repo)

[Dag Wieers <dag@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 30 Jul 2007, Ray Van Dolson wrote:

> > Looking at your requests on this you should realize that repotags are
> > what you are really asking for the minimum level, which is what epel
> > nuked to ashes. So the discussion should probably move away from this
> > list to the epel list. And since it's a dead topic there as well you
> > will not really get very far.
> 
> I know EPEL acknowledged that the whole repo-conflicts thing is an
> issue that needed to be addressed... as has been rehashed many times,
> they just didn't like repotags.
> 
> However, perhaps adding something into RPM itself could go a long way
> to addressing this in a more integrated manner?
> 
>   https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-July/msg01537.html
> 
> That thread might be a good place to request that something like this
> be added.
>
> Not sure how high of a priority everyone would consider it.

Ray,

the problem is that with a Fedora mentality you are not fixing anything 
until RHEL5 goes EOL. (somewhere in 2014 I think ?)

So yes, welcome to the RHEL world where workarounds are required because 
Red Hat has no incentive to add features.

--   dag wieers,  dag@xxxxxxxxxx,  http://dag.wieers.com/   --
[Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors]
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos