On Wed, 9 Jul 2014 21:46:28 +0200 Anders F Björklund afb@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Including working with upstream (Xfce and Fedora/EPEL), filing bugs and improving the packaging - seems like they were mostly dumped...
dumped? I've not really seen many if any bugs on epel5 xfce packages...
Well, last time I looked it was still trying to use the "Fedora" icons from the epel6 package so it seemed like it was built and left there ?
I maintain/use Xfce in Fedora. Another interested party worked on Xfce for epel5/6. I'd be happy to look at specific bugs, but I don't use it day to day there, so I wouldn't have noticed this.
The 4.6 Xfce in EPEL 5 was less polished than 4.4 in CentOS 5 Extras. For instance, the whole group (Xfce) is missing from the EPEL comps ?
Odd. I thought i had updated that.
Maybe I'm doing it wrong... I thought it was a "feature", like the "@buildsys-build" group being missing (replaced that with packages).
Nope. it should be there... I can add it, although not sure how many people care about epel5 at this point. ;) epel6 does have the groups...
With EPEL 7 still in beta, and no (or not many) Xfce packages being built so far - I decided to see how far off it was, by using Fedora. Not very, it turned out... It already runs (!), with some minor things like ConsoleKit/systemd and udisks/udisks2, with the .fc18 packages.
nonamedotc@fedoraproject.org has been heading this effort on the epel7 side. He's been building things in copr first and testing them before building in epel. We have the base/core packages aready branched.
Nice! Will make contact with him/her then, and file some new Xfce bugs. There's some really obscure ones, like the "tab" key not working (!).
Fun. ;) Thanks!
The first step would be to rebuild "@xfce-desktop" properly for .el7,
Please coordinate with nonamedotc? Or do you intend to just copy this into a seperate repo?
I don't think there's any need at this point, it should work right off EPEL. Basically the user can do: yum --enablerepo=epel groupinstall xfce-desktop
Great. Thats my idea as well.
Not sure what the deal is here if you *only* want to include the Desktops SIG, but not the rest of EPEL ? Sounds like it would involve rebuilding/resigning.
And I have no idea why it is called "epel7" and not "el7" now, if that signals some further isolation ? I will be running EL, with EPEL disabled by default.
It's to avoid confusion. Some people in the past saw that epel5/6 had 'el5' and 'el6' branches and started saying things like "thats in rhel5, see the el5 branch!". We made the epel7 branch 'epel7' to make it clear that the packages we not RHEL, but epel.
kevin