6.4 overlaps

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Sat, 23 Feb 2013 16:19:44 -0600
inode0 <inode0 at gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> Your situation probably explains most of the two large groups where
> either we see the same version or we see a lower version lingering in
> EPEL.
> 
> Why not generate these lists and exclude the packages in question from
> the metadata built for architectures where they are included in RHEL?

Yeah, I suppose we could hard code such a list into mash. 

I don't think the mash maintainers have time/desire to do this.
Would anyone else be willing to look into it? 

kevin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/epel-devel/attachments/20130225/53e63067/attachment.sig>