Re: Zabbix 2.0.2 SRPM available
On Tue, 2012-09-25 at 12:36 -0500, Greg Swift wrote:
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Kevin Fenzi <kevin(a)scrye.com>
wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 16:29:26 +0200
> Fabrice Salvaire <f.salvaire(a)genomicvision.com> wrote:
>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> I upgraded the Zabbix package to the upstream version 2.0.2. It seems
>> to work fine, except I don't tested everything.
>>
>> Thus I have the SRPM with the update for the spec file and some of
>> the sources files. How can I provide it to EPEL ?
>
> File a bug against the epel Zabbix package and the maintainer can
> review and apply your patches.
its actually a touch more complex to that unless things have changed.
The EPEL guidelines [1] state that major version updates are to be
avoided with a goal of 'yum update' just working.
I recently joined Dan Horak (sharkcz) in the work towards a 2.0 package
for Fedora and EPEL.
It's pretty complex indeed. We're switching to two users to keep agent
and proxy/server isolated better. We also switched to Debian
Alternatives to choose between database implementations and have no
conflicting sub-packages. The draft is suitable for systemd and init
scripts -- having all necessary conditionals in place and hopefully
ending the existence of 4 different branches.
I published a draft. I hope Dan can take a look at it soon. Anybody's
comment is highly appreciated.
http://www.geofrogger.net/review/z2/zabbix20-2.0.2-3.el6.src.rpm
http://www.geofrogger.net/review/z2/zabbix.Fedora is a README, that will
become part of the package.
I'm not sure how
big of a difference 1.8 -> 2.0, but 1.6 -> 1.8 was different enough.
Currently EPEL5 has 1.6 release of zabbix and EPEL6 has 1.8 release.
This has been talked about several times on list and I don't know that
anyone came up with a good resolution.
You definitely need to run a database upgrade. Since proxies and servers
must run the same major version, it'd be a good idea to also have it in
EPEL 5.
One of the options was to change the package name and host both
releases in EPEL. I'm not sure how often this actually happens, or
what the path to get there would be.
That's the approach we took. zabbix20 conflicts with zabbix. Zabbix has
a good stable-policy, so relevant changes would only appear on major x.y
releases. They're aiming for regular major releases every 9 months from
now on.
Volker Fröhlich
I asked about this with 1.8 on rhel5 and got the above response, so I
thought I'd share. That being said, take this as info not a reason to
stop :) I'm all for someone figuring out a way forward.
-greg
[1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies#A_major_version_...
_______________________________________________
epel-devel-list mailing list
epel-devel-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list