<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
      http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
    On 01/27/2011 08:33 AM, Aaron Hagopian wrote:
    <blockquote
      cite="mid:AANLkTimvrf=e5EXp6cVwsLM8X2HTYneiOD7wvtpppMtj@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div class="gmail_quote">
        <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt
          0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);
          padding-left: 1ex;">
          <div bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
            <div class="im">
              <blockquote type="cite"><br>
                <br>
                <blockquote type="cite">389-ds-base will be going into
                  RHEL 6 at some point.&nbsp; We cannot put it in EPEL6
                  because it would conflict.&nbsp; We are interested in
                  suggestions about how to provide binary packages on
                  EL6. <br>
                  <blockquote type="cite"> <br>
                  </blockquote>
                </blockquote>
                pardon my ignorance, but what would it clash with ? <br>
              </blockquote>
            </div>
            389-ds-base in RHEL6.<br>
          </div>
        </blockquote>
        <div><br>
        </div>
        <div><br>
        </div>
        <div>And I assume that's in the Directory Server channel because
          on my RHEL6 machine no 389-ds-base package exists and I do not
          have a subscription to Redhat Directory service. &nbsp;Again
          working on my assumption that means that RH directory service
          is using the same package name as 389ds which would create the
          conflict. &nbsp;So either 389-ds packages are renamed or cannot go
          in EPEL, now its making sense.</div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    389-ds-base is not _yet_ in RHEL6.&nbsp; Will be there in 6.1 or 6.2.<br>
    <blockquote
      cite="mid:AANLkTimvrf=e5EXp6cVwsLM8X2HTYneiOD7wvtpppMtj@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div class="gmail_quote">
        <div><br>
        </div>
        <div>So is there some obstacle for the 389ds project to host its
          own yum repo?</div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    Other than being a PITA?&nbsp; But if that is the only way . . .<br>
    <blockquote
      cite="mid:AANLkTimvrf=e5EXp6cVwsLM8X2HTYneiOD7wvtpppMtj@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div class="gmail_quote">
        <div><br>
        </div>
        <div><br>
        </div>
      </div>
      <br>
      <pre wrap="">
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
--
389 users mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org">389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users">https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users</a></pre>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
  </body>
</html>