On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 7:48 PM, Orion Poplawski <orion(a)cora.nwra.com>
On 05/15/2015 10:57 PM, Dave Johansen wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 8:07 PM, Orion Poplawski <orion(a)cora.nwra.com
> <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>> wrote:
> On 04/21/2015 08:48 PM, Dave Johansen wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 9:40 PM, Orion Poplawski
> <orion(a)cora.nwra.com <mailto:email@example.com>
> <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org <mailto:email@example.com>>>
> On 04/20/2015 09:32 PM, Dave Johansen wrote:
> I just noticed that the version of cmake that comes
> with RHEL 6 is
> currently 220.127.116.11 and the EPEL has a cmake28 package
> that is at
> 18.104.22.168. I believe that RHEL 6 originally shipped with
> 2.6 and
> updated in a later point release, but I have two
> 1) Is the cmake28 a duplicate and need to be removed?
> Ok. Is this already being worked on? Or does a bugzilla need to be
> created for it?
> A quick search:
> turns up: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1159351
> There is some question as to whether or not it is worth the pain to
> retire. I suppose you could also consider it pulling things away
> from EPEL users. If it is kept, it probably should be updated at
> Would it be possible to create a Bugzilla and request that a virtual
> provide for cmake28 be added to the cmake package in RHEL? I believe
> that would allow the package in EPEL to be retired without requiring
> changes to existing .spec files. I'm guessing that a cmake28 symlink
> might be needed as well, but it still seems possible and a solution that
> shouldn't have too much headache.
Sure, anything is possible :). Although I don't see what the big deal
about changing the EPEL packages would be. If anything, it would just
bring them back in line with the Fedora branches.
My concern would just be the added effort of maintaining both of them and
it falling behind like has already happened here.