On 4/14/19 4:11 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 4:04 PM Jonathan Dieter <jdieter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> So, the background is that I'd like to build zchunk for EPEL 6 (it's >> already built for EPEL 7). Unfortunately, the gcc in EL6 is too old to >> build zchunk, so I'd prefer to use a newer version from an SCL, rather >> than rewrite zchunk to be compatible with an ancient version of gcc. >> >> I noticed that SCLs are available for EPEL 7 (note the final repository >> in the list at https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taginfo?tagID=259), >> but not for EPEL 6 (see >> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taginfo?tagID=140). > > The SCL's have their uses, but for EPEL? I think they'd add > unnecessary complexity on an an unreliable developer codebase and be a > really bad idea to rely on for EPEL componenents. RHEL 6 is at release > 6.10, and should be treated as end-of-life. If the component were > being embedded into the SCL, then it might make some sense to support. > But as best I can tell zchunk has nothing to do with the SCL except > for the gcc requirement. Just to clarify: When we added devtoolset scl to epel7, the rule was that it was only to be used for build time, never runtime. I don't see a big problem doing the same for rhel6, but there hasn't been any demand for it yet. If it's strictly build time, I don't see that users would see any complications from it. kevin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
