On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 2:04 AM, Robert Scheck <[email protected]> wrote: > Technically it should be possible to make the "postfix26" package somehow > in parallel installable, but that requires a) patching postfix, b) lots and > lots of testing and c) SELinux adaptions - a huge effort for less result.
As you say it's technically possible and looking at other packages many people have gone to a lot of lengths to make packages co-exist. This is for me one of big benefit's of EPEL over some other repositories is that I know (hope) it won't break existing installations. Of course there's a place for genuine updates of packages and IUS is doing a good job providing that. I agree this is a major pain at time times, e.g I've been trying to get a parallel version of apr and apr-util built in a sensible way for some time now. I'd rather live with this packaging pain though. > I know the "Philosophy of EPEL" says "to never replace or interfere with > packages shipped by Enterprise Linux", but why should we have more strong > rules than Red Hat has? Let us look to python in EPEL-5: We're shipping > python26* packages - isn't this a "replace packages shipped by Enterprise > Linux" somehow? python26 co-exists perfectly well with default python. -- Steve Traylen _______________________________________________ epel-devel-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list
