On 24. 07. 20 19:05, Carl George wrote:
Is there a better way to achieve the results with less
risk?
What I do for this is run podman containers. I create local images of
centos+epel, then use a helper script to run them with a podman volume
mounted at/var/cache/{yum,dnf}. With my script I
> Is there a better way to achieve the results with less
> risk?
What I do for this is run podman containers. I create local images of
centos+epel, then use a helper script to run them with a podman volume
mounted at /var/cache/{yum,dnf}. With my script I can run repoquery
commands prefixed by
On 21. 07. 20 22:14, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Well, not sure. Is there some way to put the repo files in a doc space
or something and only get repoquery to use them, not normal dnf
commands? I can't think of how to make it work, but perhaps dnf people
could? could we request a
On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 02:06:43PM +0200, Miro Hron=C4=8Dok wrote:
> On 07. 07. 20 14:08, Tomas Orsava wrote:
> > On 6/30/20 9:10 PM, Miro Hron=C4=8Dok wrote:
> > > On 30. 06. 20 21:03, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > > > I don't think a package-review is needed? It would just be unretiri=
ng
> > > > the
On 07. 07. 20 14:08, Tomas Orsava wrote:
On 6/30/20 9:10 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 30. 06. 20 21:03, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
I don't think a package-review is needed? It would just be unretiring
the fedora branches of an existing package?
Technically, the package is "retired for 8+ weeks" on
On 6/30/20 9:10 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 30. 06. 20 21:03, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
I don't think a package-review is needed? It would just be unretiring
the fedora branches of an existing package?
Technically, the package is "retired for 8+ weeks" on Fedora. Hence a
new review request.
That
On 30. 06. 20 21:03, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
I don't think a package-review is needed? It would just be unretiring
the fedora branches of an existing package?
Technically, the package is "retired for 8+ weeks" on Fedora. Hence a new review
request.
That said, I am -1 on the idea.
You have no
On 30. 06. 20 20:57, Neal Gompa wrote:
I'm not sure this is a good idea. Also, queries and figuring out
dependencies still requires having RHEL/CentOS repositories, which
this package would not provide.
That is a known limitation, but I wouldn't say this makes it "not a good idea".
Would you
On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 06:46:43PM -, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> To scratch my own itch I've packaged EPEL repos for Fedora. I've decided to
> use the existing epel-release component for this (but I am OK to get a
> different name, such as epel-repos).
>
> See
On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 2:46 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> To scratch my own itch I've packaged EPEL repos for Fedora. I've decided to
> use the existing epel-release component for this (but I am OK to get a
> different name, such as epel-repos).
>
> See
10 matches
Mail list logo
