[EPEL-devel] Re: PSA: epel-rpm-macros in EL5 mock buildroots

2016-04-04 Thread Jason L Tibbitts III
> "DJ" == Dave Johansen writes: DJ> To my knowledge mock for EL 5 has been broken for several months DJ> now: I've had no problems using it. I did rebuild all of EPEL5 at least ten times recently and while there were plenty of failures I'm pretty sure those failures were due to broken packa

[EPEL-devel] Re: PSA: epel-rpm-macros in EL5 mock buildroots

2016-04-04 Thread Kevin Fenzi
On Mon, 4 Apr 2016 11:47:42 -0700 Dave Johansen wrote: > To my knowledge mock for EL 5 has been broken for several months now: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/GC3INT2TX3OZ7YBLIJ5H6LH2WMZNBTPR/#ZDKVRSLJEJSPMN7FQ5LYO66NBP5IIRKE yet, there a

[EPEL-devel] Re: PSA: epel-rpm-macros in EL5 mock buildroots

2016-04-04 Thread Dave Johansen
On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 11:32 AM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > Something went wrong when epel-rpm-macros-5 was added to the EPEL5 > buildroot such that it works fine in koji but isn't actually present > when you build in mock. So if you were trying to de-cruft your specs > and found that things

[EPEL-devel] PSA: epel-rpm-macros in EL5 mock buildroots

2016-04-04 Thread Jason L Tibbitts III
Something went wrong when epel-rpm-macros-5 was added to the EPEL5 buildroot such that it works fine in koji but isn't actually present when you build in mock. So if you were trying to de-cruft your specs and found that things weren't working as you expected when you did a mock build, that's why.

[EPEL-devel] Re: Real world use cases with base versus SCL

2016-04-04 Thread Kevin Fenzi
On Mon, 4 Apr 2016 17:47:25 +0100 James Hogarth wrote: ...snip... > How do others feel and does the Steering Committee feel it might be > time to revisit the SCL question? I'm against using SCL in epel until there are approved Fedora guidelines. The FPC folks know what they are doing and can

[EPEL-devel] Re: Real world use cases with base versus SCL

2016-04-04 Thread Stephen John Smoogen
On 4 April 2016 at 10:47, James Hogarth wrote: > HI all, > How do others feel and does the Steering Committee feel it might be time to > revisit the SCL question? > There are 2 issues which still have to be dealt with. 1) The upstream Fedora maintainers are not keen on SCL's. We could say 'yay'

[EPEL-devel] Real world use cases with base versus SCL

2016-04-04 Thread James Hogarth
HI all, I was just wondering how the rest of the EPEL community felt in this area and if perhaps teh EPEL Steering Committee might want to review policies surrounding SCL use. There's a growing need for more modern language versions in the EL world. I've only just encountered this situation in c

[EPEL-devel] Re: 32 bit revisited

2016-04-04 Thread john tatt
Hi everybody Where are we now with the project of 32bits epel7 repo ? Thanks De : Kevin Fenzi À : epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Cc : john tatt Envoyé le : Vendredi 29 janvier 2016 23h05 Objet : [EPEL-devel] Re: 32 bit revisited On Fri, 29 Jan 2016 11:46:04 + (UTC) john ta