On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 4:41 PM, Richard <lists-centos at listmail.innovate.net> wrote:> >>>> Thanks, but it doesn't help to --enablerepo=epel-testing. The >>>> libgtop2 package should be from the base repo anyway. >>> >>> Sorry, just checked. It looks to be in "cr". >> >> So... the right thing to do for someone who just wants to update a >> system today would be??? > > Probably depends on your view of CR. Here's the announcement for it > the other day: > > <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-announce/2015-March/020980.html> > > I updated a machine the other day with a combination of CR and > epel-testing (key MATE things were there still) and it seems fine, > though I haven't tested it heavily yet. The epel things that were in > -testing may have moved to epel base by now. >It's not so much a matter of having a "view" of CR as that I didn't expect things to appear in EPEL that depend on base versions that aren't in general release yet. Is that intentional, and don't some number of people have to approve something before it gets out of epel-testing? Does everyone else have cr enabled? -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com
On 03/26/2015 04:47 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:> On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 4:41 PM, Richard > <lists-centos at listmail.innovate.net> wrote: >> >>>>> Thanks, but it doesn't help to --enablerepo=epel-testing. The >>>>> libgtop2 package should be from the base repo anyway. >>>> >>>> Sorry, just checked. It looks to be in "cr". >>> >>> So... the right thing to do for someone who just wants to update a >>> system today would be??? >> >> Probably depends on your view of CR. Here's the announcement for it >> the other day: >> >> <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-announce/2015-March/020980.html> >> >> I updated a machine the other day with a combination of CR and >> epel-testing (key MATE things were there still) and it seems fine, >> though I haven't tested it heavily yet. The epel things that were in >> -testing may have moved to epel base by now. >> > > It's not so much a matter of having a "view" of CR as that I didn't > expect things to appear in EPEL that depend on base versions that > aren't in general release yet. Is that intentional, and don't some > number of people have to approve something before it gets out of > epel-testing? Does everyone else have cr enabled? >See my other post to this list. EPEL is written for and built against RHEL, which is on 7.1. You will either have to wait until we release our 7.1, use CR or buy RHEL. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 198 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20150326/378eaebb/attachment-0001.sig>
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 4:53 PM, Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org> wrote:>>> >> It's not so much a matter of having a "view" of CR as that I didn't >> expect things to appear in EPEL that depend on base versions that >> aren't in general release yet. Is that intentional, and don't some >> number of people have to approve something before it gets out of >> epel-testing? Does everyone else have cr enabled? >> > > See my other post to this list. EPEL is written for and built against > RHEL, which is on 7.1. You will either have to wait until we release > our 7.1, use CR or buy RHEL.That makes sense - but it also makes it an ongoing issue for Centos users to expect. It's not a serious problem for me, but it would be a bad first experience with CentOS if someone tries to install a system with MATE Desktop today. -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com