On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 8:06 PM, Dennis Gilmore <dennis(a)ausil.us> wrote:
On Thursday 14 January 2010 07:01:37 pm Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 5:28 PM, Kevin Fenzi <kevin(a)tummy.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 17:21:31 -0700
> >
> > Stephen John Smoogen <smooge(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Ok there are 76 direct conflicts between RH sub-channels and EPEL
> >
> > Which sub-channels exactly?
Packages in satellite, directory server, and certificate system are expected to
possibly cause conflicts. the open source equivilent are branded under
diferent product names and are undergoing work explictly to get them into
epel.
That is interesting.
I know i personally pulled a bunch of the packages from epel to put
into
satellite and if we pull them from epel i would be extremely disappointed.
In the satellite case you only have a supported satellite server if you use
software from the rhn channels adding epel to a satellite box will
immediately make you unsupported.
Adding EPEL makes a RHEL box of any sort unsupported, but Red Hat is
not a stickler about this unless what you have done is likely the
cause your problem. Then you remove it and reproduce.
Thinking more about this I do think someone running a layered product
would probably be much less likely to use a third party repo though
than other random RHEL boxes would be.
If Red Hat is using EPEL as an upstream for its layered products I
think EPEL should be able to expect some cooperation from Red Hat in
the future.
John