On 28.09.2007 01:07, Jos Vos wrote:
On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 03:55:59PM -0700, Florin Andrei wrote:
> Today I grabbed the latest rsyslog-1.19.6-2.fc8.src.rpm from Fedora
> Development and rebuilt it on RHEL4 32bit. Seems to work fine after very
> summary testing.
> Perhaps that should be the reference used for EPEL? Anyway, mainstream
> just released 1.19.8 today.
Does EPEL have rules about what packages EPEL packages can be based on?
I mean: should EPEL packages be based only on non-test Fedora src.rpm's?
Fedora IMHO for EPEL is kind of "testing ground" (just like it is for
RHEL). Having similar Specs used in EPEL and Fedora also makes
exchanging bugfixes a whole lot easier.
Thus it IMHO would be best for all if the EPEL spec file is based on the
Fedora one. But that's not a hard requirement.
> I did notice it does not chkconfig off the syslog service after
Question is what to do when adding a package (rsyslog) that in fact
obsoletes a regular RHEL5 package (sysklogd).
One of the (in parts unwritten IIRC) rules is: don't disturb the
distribution we build for (e.g. RHEL in this case). So obsoleting is a
Personally, I would opt
for what I did: make sure installing the (rsyslog) package does not
affect anything related to regular RHEL5 packages (sysklogd) and let
the sysadmin do the config work afterwards (in this case doing two
chkconfig commands and editting two logrotate files).
That should be fine.