Hi guys,
A trend I see either on twitter, or irc, or elsewhere is a complaint about Epel not available for CentOS 7 userland on armhfp.
It's of course technically true (as there is nothing listed on the Epel wiki page itself) but we covered that FAQ in our wiki : https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/AltArch/Arm32#head-f2a772703b3c...
Unfortunately, it seems that people never read that wiki page.
So I was just wondering if we could have our epel rebuild effort (https://armv7.dev.centos.org/repodir/epel-pass-1/) available directly for our armhfp users, without having them to do anything special.
Now I'm wondering if we should just create a .repo (and coming from centos-userland-release) but have it disabled by default (imho) or even enable it by default (-1 on my side)
Also, we should probably just rename it to something else than 'Epel' as we can't call that epel : it's a rebuild from Epel SRPMs but it's not Epel
Opinions, Thoughts ? please make hear your voice !
PS : also trying to make some noise on twitter to bring back users not subscribed to the arm-dev list, or not hanging around in #centos-arm on irc.freenode.net
Fabian,
This is important; to do the extras you need for a lot of server platforms. I know nothing about twitter or irc; I am only an emailer correspondent (or web forum when I am forced to). It is kind of sad that what should be the main for of user communication, is just not used. That said, you know that I struggled with the EPEL-arm7 (and I feel that is what we should call it), as many of the rpms I needed did build, but were not available from the repo. I had to download them, then install locally.
But let's take this point by point.
On 07/29/2017 06:54 AM, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
Hi guys,
A trend I see either on twitter, or irc, or elsewhere is a complaint about Epel not available for CentOS 7 userland on armhfp.
It's of course technically true (as there is nothing listed on the Epel wiki page itself) but we covered that FAQ in our wiki : https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/AltArch/Arm32#head-f2a772703b3c...
And I put one in my howto at: http://www.htt-consult.com/Centos7-armv7.html#EPEL
I use a slightly different command:
cat <<EOF>/etc/yum.repos.d/epel.repo || exit 1
Unfortunately, it seems that people never read that wiki page.
So I was just wondering if we could have our epel rebuild effort (https://armv7.dev.centos.org/repodir/epel-pass-1/) available directly for our armhfp users, without having them to do anything special.
That would be very nice. One less thing to figure out.
Now I'm wondering if we should just create a .repo (and coming from centos-userland-release) but have it disabled by default (imho) or even enable it by default (-1 on my side)
Disabled by default. It is easy to tell people to enable what is there, than explain how to add it. And I suppose there are situations where having it could cause issues? I don't know enough to answer that one.
Also, we should probably just rename it to something else than 'Epel' as we can't call that epel : it's a rebuild from Epel SRPMs but it's not Epel
EPEL-arm7 or EPEL-arm7hl
Opinions, Thoughts ? please make hear your voice !
PS : also trying to make some noise on twitter to bring back users not subscribed to the arm-dev list, or not hanging around in #centos-arm on irc.freenode.net
I make noise on the main Centos list where I occasionally see arm questions.
And can perhaps there be a pass-2 that has more in the repo instead of having to search for the rpms separately? See:
http://www.htt-consult.com/Centos7-mailserver.html#Installing%20Mail%20packa...
Bob
Oh, and if this is done by spinning up new images, please enlarge /boot or fix update-boot.
I ran out of space in the default 500Mb /boot partition. In fact, I am getting low on the servers where I increased /boot to 1Gb, so enhancing update-boot is probably the better route...
On 07/29/2017 06:54 AM, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
Hi guys,
A trend I see either on twitter, or irc, or elsewhere is a complaint about Epel not available for CentOS 7 userland on armhfp.
It's of course technically true (as there is nothing listed on the Epel wiki page itself) but we covered that FAQ in our wiki : https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/AltArch/Arm32#head-f2a772703b3c...
Unfortunately, it seems that people never read that wiki page.
So I was just wondering if we could have our epel rebuild effort (https://armv7.dev.centos.org/repodir/epel-pass-1/) available directly for our armhfp users, without having them to do anything special.
Now I'm wondering if we should just create a .repo (and coming from centos-userland-release) but have it disabled by default (imho) or even enable it by default (-1 on my side)
Also, we should probably just rename it to something else than 'Epel' as we can't call that epel : it's a rebuild from Epel SRPMs but it's not Epel
Opinions, Thoughts ? please make hear your voice !
PS : also trying to make some noise on twitter to bring back users not subscribed to the arm-dev list, or not hanging around in #centos-arm on irc.freenode.net
Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev