On 5 Sep 2017 8:05 am, "Vít Ondruch" <vondruch@redhat.com> wrote:

Dne 4.9.2017 v 14:58 James Hogarth napsal(a):

>
> I'm in two minds whether to suggest we leave facter as it is for
> F25-27 or whether to at least update those to 2.5.1 which won't have
> the drastic 3.0 changes.

For me it is always clear. Keep the branched versions as they are unless
you have really good arguments for upgrade.

Usually I'd agree... but facter is way behind on bug fixes and hasn't seen an update in two years... a full three fedora releases ago.

A move to the most recent 2.X on the branches whilst 3.X is arranged in rawhide has decent justification... but I'll wait on what to do with that after a discussion with upstream.

> I've also not looked fully into the EPEL situation but from an initial
> cursory look of gemfiles I think the ruby versions there are out of
> their support matrix.

Well, there is still just Ruby 1.8.7 in EPEL6 and these are rather old
and incompatible (mainly due to encoding support and character
handling). It should be better in EPEL7 with Ruby 2.0.0. Upstreams tends
to drop official support for older Rubies (without any real reason
except reducing the support matrix), but the code typically works
(although you might need to relax some dependencies).

One thing to always consider is the dependency chain, including the
build dependencies ...

Yeah this is another package that's just going to be left at an old version in EPEL6 I fear... I really wish we could link to Red Hat SCL packages for these situations... but oh well. Since my only direction/goal I this endeavour is the removal is the requirement of net-tools, and that's only Fedora, I'm not going to worry about it for now.