On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 8:24 AM Alexander Bokovoy abokovoy@redhat.com wrote:
A distribution vendor have of course the right to limit the support but this specific case (missing devel rpm) leaves a bad taste on customers side and results in a bad experience. IMHO this experience contradicts RH's strategy pushing this platform ...
I think a productive way would be to file bugs asking to get the packages in, with explanation why they are needed and how they would be used.
I did the same for quota-devel already -- its lack doesn't allow us to test the quota-related functionality in Samba CI upstream, for example.
-- / Alexander Bokovoy Sr. Principal Software Engineer Security / Identity Management Engineering Red Hat Limited, Finland
Do feel free to play with my backports of Samba, with quota-devel compiled into a local yum repository for local builds with CentOS 8 or RHEL 8, over at https://github.com/nkadel/samba4repo . The process of porting it to CentOS 8 was complicated by Red Hat's decision to activate modularity in an awkwardly integrated fashion, and requires resetting the mock configurations to "best=0", documented at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1756681 .And I've published pull requiest for that to the mock developers.
This decision to stop including the devel package means I've had to include a local build tree for "quota" in my Samba development environment, and it's likely to break my development environment when quota gets even a minor version update and my locally published quota-devel package no longer matches. I don't want to waste my time on this sort of thing, and I do pay for RHEL licenses. I hope that CentOS elects not to emulate this silliness and puts the quota-edevel package in the "PowerTools" channel.