On 08/01/2017 01:05 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On 1 August 2017 at 12:32, Jeffrey Ollie > wrote:
Building 12.1.1 for EPEL7 would be VERY bad IMNSHO. 0.80.7 _is_
seriously out of date, but:
[snip]
I will bring this up at the meeting
The last version of Ceph that was built in epel7 was 0.80.7, back in
December, 2016.
That's pretty seriously out of date.
Is anyone going to have any heartache if I build 12.1.1 for epel7?
--
Kaleb
___
epel-devel mailing list --
On 08/01/2017 01:05 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
I will bring this up at the meeting tomorrow, but I believe that the
plan would be something like the following:
1. "Update" the current package with README.deprecated explaining why
the package is being removed from the repository and
I've noticed that puiterwijk and kevin have done builds recently of
glusterfs.
It's unclear to me why anyone would do that. I don't mind really, but I
want remind everyone that glusterfs was retired from EPEL when RHEL
started to ship glusterfs client-side RPMs.
The correct place to get el7
On 08/01/2017 01:05 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
I will bring this up at the meeting tomorrow, but I believe that the
plan would be something like the following:
1. "Update" the current package with README.deprecated explaining why
the package is being removed from the repository and
Hi,
I'm considering $subject.
1) the nfs-ganesha pkgs in EPEL are mildly crippled due to missing
glusterfs -devel and ceph -devel packages in RHEL or EPEL. (The gluster
-devel packages are not in the RHEL base channel, and probably won't
ever be.) And they haven't been updated in a long time.
see https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2017-a4e3aae817
The package build I made with a README.deprecated has reached 14+ days
in testing in bodhi.
There was a single comment by anonymous to the effect that RHEL7 has
ceph-94.5 with a -1 karma vote which appears to have not been