Need to have some packages rebuilt in EPEL

[Stephen John Smoogen]

OK something for people to help with:

There is a po4a package which over-rides the version that is in RHEL-7
optional. It needs to be removed from EPEL and packages depending on
it need to be rebuilt against the RHEL version with a bump in NEVR get
pulled on updates.

[Kevin Fenzi]

On 04/14/2017 12:05 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> OK something for people to help with:
>
> There is a po4a package which over-rides the version that is in RHEL-7
> optional. It needs to be removed from EPEL and packages depending on
> it need to be rebuilt against the RHEL version with a bump in NEVR get
> pulled on updates.

Well, I filed:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1443685

Unfortunately to match the limited arch guidelines the package needs to
be _older_ than it is now in epel.

I'm not sure if we can get yum to do the right thing and downgrade it,
but we could try.

kevin

[Sérgio Basto]

On Qua, 2017-04-19 at 12:03 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On 04/14/2017 12:05 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> > OK something for people to help with:
> >
> > There is a po4a package which over-rides the version that is in
> > RHEL-7
> > optional. It needs to be removed from EPEL and packages depending
> > on
> > it need to be rebuilt against the RHEL version with a bump in NEVR
> > get
> > pulled on updates.
>
> Well, I filed:
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1443685
>
> Unfortunately to match the limited arch guidelines the package needs
> to
> be _older_ than it is now in epel.
>
> I'm not sure if we can get yum to do the right thing and downgrade
> it,
> but we could try.

ah , I built po4a to build dpkg on epel7 , but in fact po4a was added
to centos 7 some moments before (I don't know if in RHEL7) and that is
why it misses ppc64 arch [1] IIRC. BTW it also misses on ppc64, perl-
gettext [2], maybe should be good also coordinate the fix of this
package too. 
If you could fix these 2 packages may the best is remove po4a from 
epel7 repo , if it is possible ... or bump epoch on RHEL7 ...

Best regards,

[1] 
https://src.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/po4a.git/tree/po4a.spec#n79
[2]
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1196539
> kevin
>
> epel-devel mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail].
> org

[Kevin Fenzi]

> ah , I built po4a to build dpkg on epel7 , but in fact po4a was added
> to centos 7 some moments before (I don't know if in RHEL7)

It is. It's in rhel7-server-optional. Note that CentOS doesn't do any of
the channel stuff, all of base, optional, etc all just are in their base
repo IIRC.

and that is
> why it misses ppc64 arch [1] IIRC. BTW it also misses on ppc64, perl-
> gettext [2], maybe should be good also coordinate the fix of this
> package too.

Yeah, I started looking at the spec and saw that comment as well.
> If you could fix these 2 packages may the best is remove po4a from 
> epel7 repo , if it is possible ... or bump epoch on RHEL7 ...

Well, We can push out a lower version of the package, but people who
already have the newer one installed will just still have that. It would
fix new installs and the like though.

We definitely don't want to add an Epoch, because the idea is that we
keep the EPEL package "older" than the RHEL one so people who install
get the official one (if available on their arch).

kevin

[Sérgio Basto]

On Qua, 2017-04-19 at 15:16 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > ah , I built po4a to build dpkg on epel7 , but in fact po4a was
> > added
> > to centos 7 some moments before (I don't know if in RHEL7)
>
> It is. It's in rhel7-server-optional. Note that CentOS doesn't do any
> of
> the channel stuff, all of base, optional, etc all just are in their
> base
> repo IIRC.
>
> and that is
> > why it misses ppc64 arch [1] IIRC. BTW it also misses on ppc64,
> > perl-
> > gettext [2], maybe should be good also coordinate the fix of this
> > package too.
>
> Yeah, I started looking at the spec and saw that comment as well.
> > If you could fix these 2 packages may the best is remove po4a from 
> > epel7 repo , if it is possible ... or bump epoch on RHEL7 ...
>
> Well, We can push out a lower version of the package, but people who
> already have the newer one installed will just still have that. It
> would
> fix new installs and the like though.
>
> We definitely don't want to add an Epoch, because the idea is that we
> keep the EPEL package "older" than the RHEL one so people who install
> get the official one (if available on their arch).

I wrote my second reply before read this message anyway 
feel free to do anything with po4a.

Thanks,

[Sérgio Basto]

On Qua, 2017-04-19 at 21:51 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Qua, 2017-04-19 at 12:03 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > On 04/14/2017 12:05 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> > > OK something for people to help with:
> > >
> > > There is a po4a package which over-rides the version that is in
> > > RHEL-7
> > > optional. It needs to be removed from EPEL and packages depending
> > > on
> > > it need to be rebuilt against the RHEL version with a bump in
> > > NEVR
> > > get
> > > pulled on updates.
> >
> > Well, I filed:
> >
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1443685
> >
> > Unfortunately to match the limited arch guidelines the package
> > needs
> > to
> > be _older_ than it is now in epel.
> >
> > I'm not sure if we can get yum to do the right thing and downgrade
> > it,
> > but we could try.
>
> ah , I built po4a to build dpkg on epel7 , but in fact po4a was added
> to centos 7 some moments before (I don't know if in RHEL7) and that
> is
> why it misses ppc64 arch [1] IIRC. BTW it also misses on ppc64, perl-
> gettext [2], maybe should be good also coordinate the fix of this
> package too. 
> If you could fix these 2 packages may the best is remove po4a from 
> epel7 repo , if it is possible ... or bump epoch on RHEL7 ...

If Centos have the packages and RHEL not and the packages aren't
available on ppc64 because of this reason, we may think on also not
build dpkg and many debian tools on ppc64 ... 
We (reporter of bugs) miss understood the build failures, when we saw
that some package was missing , we do not notice that was only on ppc64
... and that was the confusion ... sorry .
> Best regards,
>
> [1] 
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/po4a.git/tree/po4a.spec#n79
> [2]
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1196539
> > kevin
> >
> > epel-devel mailing list -- [e-mail]
> > To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
> > t.
> > org
>
> -- 
> Sérgio M. B.
> _______________________________________________
> epel-devel mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail].
> org