[EPEL-devel] Re: Questions about installing epel-release

2020-06-29 Thread Wei, Catherine 
Hi,

  *   Have you downloaded the package over HTTPS?

I installed it using “dnf install epel-release”

  *   Results of rpm -V epel-release and rpm -qi epel-release
[root@katt-shanghai katt-server-install]# rpm -V epel-release
[root@katt-shanghai katt-server-install]# rpm -qi epel-release
Name: epel-release
Version : 7
Release : 11
Architecture: noarch
Install Date: Sun 28 Jun 2020 04:25:48 PM CST
Group   : System Environment/Base
Size: 24834
License : GPLv2
Signature   : RSA/SHA256, Fri 11 May 2018 08:21:29 PM CST, Key ID 
24c6a8a7f4a80eb5
Source RPM  : epel-release-7-11.src.rpm
Build Date  : Tue 03 Oct 2017 01:45:58 AM CST
Build Host  : buildvm-ppc64le-05.ppc.fedoraproject.org
Relocations : (not relocatable)
Packager: Fedora Project
Vendor  : Fedora Project
URL : http://download.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel
Summary : Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux repository configuration
Description :
This package contains the Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux (EPEL) repository
GPG key as well as configuration for yum.


?  Contents of  /etc/yum.repos.d/epel.repo
[root@katt-shanghai katt-server-install]# cat  /etc/yum.repos.d/epel.repo
[epel]
name=Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux 7 - $basearch
#baseurl=http://download.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/7/$basearch
metalink=https://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/metalink?repo=epel-7=$basearch
failovermethod=priority
enabled=1
gpgcheck=1
gpgkey=file:///etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-EPEL-7

[epel-debuginfo]
name=Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux 7 - $basearch - Debug
#baseurl=http://download.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/7/$basearch/debug
metalink=https://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/metalink?repo=epel-debug-7=$basearch
failovermethod=priority
enabled=0
gpgkey=file:///etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-EPEL-7
gpgcheck=1

[epel-source]
name=Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux 7 - $basearch - Source
#baseurl=http://download.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/7/SRPMS
metalink=https://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/metalink?repo=epel-source-7=$basearch
failovermethod=priority
enabled=0
gpgkey=file:///etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-EPEL-7
gpgcheck=1


Best regards,
Catherine
From: Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski 
Sent: 2020年6月30日 4:13
To: epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Subject: [EPEL-devel] Re: Questions about installing epel-release

On Monday, 29 June 2020 at 03:27, Wei, Catherine wrote: > Thanks. I fixed this 
by changing the reposdir=/etc/yum.163.yum.repos.d > to /etc/yum.repos.d/, then 
the epel repository can be found. The
Caution (External, domi...@greysector.net)
First-Time Sender   
Details
Report This 
Email
  FAQ  Protection by 
INKY


On Monday, 29 June 2020 at 03:27, Wei, Catherine wrote:

> Thanks. I fixed this by changing the reposdir=/etc/yum.163.yum.repos.d

> to /etc/yum.repos.d/, then the epel repository can be found.



There are no such references in the epel-release package. Have you

downloaded the package over HTTPS? Can you post the output of:

rpm -V epel-release

rpm -qi epel-release

and the contents of /etc/yum.repos.d/epel.repo ?



Regards,

Dominik

--

Fedora   
https://secure-web.cisco.com/1QcUb_gPCNzTEib4aNdEdlw36pVzG16RQMlDJdaaIb00zH2o88WOxvMhi5aJ-8kBG0TUHFSx4I29_lh3J4T7xhuZFJ8x611U_gxGHTqZQtGP-iyJnT3xhLGwyU10kE1tHMVCHspDSyVFOcWMLpXOVB8Rvbsulc2_cevNjOWnlaVwqPeSc6dNbbrcpj58NMJSMLa1m8-P-n1TdvkPP4TrVtzyo5snrUbydAk4eaveU1cHBx8WVtCJG8dTxl7POv5G-yhslEkPFAjV3k_2AQL4LcFFoBGc4wQHal4G97Z0AqFV3o_B--8Wa397zjTlqUTUUj94HzdIrKb9NE5Ly7IWH_PGu-k9lgRilJ7CidLz3qfg/https%3A%2F%2Fgetfedora.org
  |  RPM Fusion  
http://secure-web.cisco.com/1rxlWGtp9OvIOEJ0xGpPZRo4QMNLMiOvwEY87U8onxDMPuFhF9OJlL5lB8tGXjwLOFZRwupfJ0cfwbPR3dqEAFxxAAIovo67aB-a_MLpFsNYYRicQHedPsBg-Sp1tgHvlGFnCGhNiKxFaBgSMR0t7wZ7CNmWsZspkW_kdOafhtSyilxYSQlj_3Btj_ICx5xVE1ocXfvWDm4YnjO8EKv_UMxYsnokFo-57Vlst0b6XYvqdbBNEQE0LL3PPkvrSqxS4crq6TI2yo-jdS5HB7QmhNQInEJHfNXs-rUwHQIUjhfVhU2C-fE6E2YaaXBqscB5A8TpxMIRMfd-GxhK4oO6kYQ/http%3A%2F%2Frpmfusion.org

There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and

oppression to develop psychic muscles.

-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan

___

epel-devel mailing list -- 
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

To unsubscribe send an email to 
epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/

List Guidelines:

[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 6 updates-testing report

2020-06-29 Thread updates 
The following Fedora EPEL 6 Security updates need testing:
 Age  URL
  13  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-be517af396   
tcpreplay-4.3.3-1.el6
  13  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-e982b1bb7c   
php-horde-horde-5.2.23-1.el6
  10  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-d2ea82902e   
python-httplib2-0.18.1-1.el6


The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 6 updates-testing

bgpq4-0.0.6-1.el6
php-horde-imp-6.2.26-1.el6

Details about builds:



 bgpq4-0.0.6-1.el6 (FEDORA-EPEL-2020-7fcbb78eb7)
 Automate BGP filter generation based on routing database information

Update Information:

The bgpq4 utility can be used to generate BGP filter configurations such as
prefix lists, (extended) access lists, policy statement terms and AS path lists
based on routing database information and supports output formats for BIRD,
Cisco, Huawei, Juniper, MikroTik, Nokia and OpenBGPD routers as well as generic
JSON.

ChangeLog:


References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #1847220 - Review Request: bgpq4 - Automate BGP filter generation 
based on routing database information
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1847220




 php-horde-imp-6.2.26-1.el6 (FEDORA-EPEL-2020-3e475e2297)
 A web based webmail system

Update Information:

**imp 6.2.26**  * [mjr] Fix syntax error.  ---  **imp 6.2.25**  * [mjr] Fix some
null reference errors due to edge case broken messages.

ChangeLog:

* Mon Jun 29 2020 Remi Collet  - 6.2.26-1
- update to 6.2.26


___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[EPEL-devel] Re: EPEL 8: modular libnghttp2 replaces package from RHEL base

2020-06-29 Thread Leon Fauster 

Am 29.06.20 um 21:41 schrieb Tuomo Soini:

On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 17:32:58 +0200
Leon Fauster  wrote:



For those that have an automated update process in place.
What steps are needed to revert this mistake?


"dnf distro-sync" after issue has been corrected. Issue has been fixed
but not applied yet. It only gets fixed after next module compose.



Okay, thanks.

--
Leon
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[EPEL-devel] Re: Questions about installing epel-release

2020-06-29 Thread Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski 
On Monday, 29 June 2020 at 03:27, Wei, Catherine wrote:
> Thanks. I fixed this by changing the reposdir=/etc/yum.163.yum.repos.d
> to /etc/yum.repos.d/, then the epel repository can be found.

There are no such references in the epel-release package. Have you
downloaded the package over HTTPS? Can you post the output of:
rpm -V epel-release
rpm -qi epel-release
and the contents of /etc/yum.repos.d/epel.repo ?

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora   https://getfedora.org  |  RPM Fusion  http://rpmfusion.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[EPEL-devel] Re: EPEL 8: modular libnghttp2 replaces package from RHEL base

2020-06-29 Thread Tuomo Soini 
On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 17:32:58 +0200
Leon Fauster  wrote:

> 
> For those that have an automated update process in place.
> What steps are needed to revert this mistake?

"dnf distro-sync" after issue has been corrected. Issue has been fixed
but not applied yet. It only gets fixed after next module compose.

-- 
Tuomo Soini 
Foobar Linux services
+358 40 5240030
Foobar Oy 
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[EPEL-devel] Re: EPEL 8: modular libnghttp2 replaces package from RHEL base

2020-06-29 Thread Leon Fauster 

Am 29.06.20 um 17:16 schrieb Troy Dawson:

Hi Felix,
I wasn't offended by your tone.  I felt the same way when I saw this on Friday.

Although dnf sees these as two different modules, since they have same
name and stream, dnf lumps them together.  When that happens, dnf uses
the packages with the highest Name-Version-Release (NVR).  In this
case, unfortunately, the EPEL package NVR's are higher, and thus dnf
is choosing them.
This is a known behavior.
We were hoping that EPEL module maintainers would avoid these
conflicts.  But as I said earlier, mistakes happen.
When we looked last week, we saw that there were now three modules
with the same module and stream names as RHEL modules. Only one was
enabled by default, but clearly something needed to be done.

We (The EPEL Steering Committee) are working on not only a policy
change, but hopefully a solution that will keep this from happening in
the future.
https://pagure.io/epel/issue/104

I've put this same information in your bugzilla, but I wanted to also
put it here, so people don't have to go to the bug to see this
information.



For those that have an automated update process in place.
What steps are needed to revert this mistake?

--
Leon
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[EPEL-devel] Re: EPEL 8: modular libnghttp2 replaces package from RHEL base

2020-06-29 Thread Troy Dawson 
Hi Felix,
I wasn't offended by your tone.  I felt the same way when I saw this on Friday.

Although dnf sees these as two different modules, since they have same
name and stream, dnf lumps them together.  When that happens, dnf uses
the packages with the highest Name-Version-Release (NVR).  In this
case, unfortunately, the EPEL package NVR's are higher, and thus dnf
is choosing them.
This is a known behavior.
We were hoping that EPEL module maintainers would avoid these
conflicts.  But as I said earlier, mistakes happen.
When we looked last week, we saw that there were now three modules
with the same module and stream names as RHEL modules. Only one was
enabled by default, but clearly something needed to be done.

We (The EPEL Steering Committee) are working on not only a policy
change, but hopefully a solution that will keep this from happening in
the future.
https://pagure.io/epel/issue/104

I've put this same information in your bugzilla, but I wanted to also
put it here, so people don't have to go to the bug to see this
information.

On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 6:57 AM Felix Schwarz
 wrote:
>
> Hi Troy,
>
> thank you for the pointer and sorry if my tone was a bit harsh.
>
> I filed also https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1851642 - is that
> the right place?
>
> Felix
>
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[EPEL-devel] Re: EPEL 8: modular libnghttp2 replaces package from RHEL base

2020-06-29 Thread Felix Schwarz 
Hi Troy,

thank you for the pointer and sorry if my tone was a bit harsh.

I filed also https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1851642 - is that
the right place?

Felix
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[EPEL-devel] Re: EPEL 8: modular libnghttp2 replaces package from RHEL base

2020-06-29 Thread Troy Dawson 
Policies don't mean mistakes won't happen.
A mistake happened and
A) We are trying to clean it up as soon as possible [1]
B) We are trying to work with mbs and infrastructure to make sure this
can't happen in the future.

I'm sorry this is so short on details, but I need to either write a
short email now, or a long email later.
Hopefully others can fill in the details.

Troy

[1] https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9554

On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 12:41 AM Felix Schwarz
 wrote:
>
>
> This morning I got an email notification:
>
> 
>
>  Package  Arch Version Repository  
> Size
>
> 
> Aktualisieren:
>
>  libnghttp2   x86_64   1.41.0-1.module_el8+9071+b2b61c14   epel-modular78 
> k
>
> Enabling module streams:
>
>  nodejs10
>
>
> As far as I know "libnghttp2" is provided in CentOS/RHEL base so this modular
> package just replaced the previous from CentOS? Also the "nodejs" module got
> enabled automatically?
>
> What is going on here? I thought we had contained the modularity fallout
> pretty much with Fedora's (+EPEL's) policies.
>
> Felix
> ___
> epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: 
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org