http://mirror.centos.org/centos/6/sclo/x86_64/rh/repodata/
On 28-Jun-2018 09:07 git19 was in the repodata. On 03-Jul-2018 it was not. Is this package no longer supported?
On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 2:45 PM, BC centoslistmail@gmail.com wrote:
http://mirror.centos.org/centos/6/sclo/x86_64/rh/repodata/
On 28-Jun-2018 09:07 git19 was in the repodata. On 03-Jul-2018 it was not. Is this package no longer supported?
I forgot to mention the RPMs are still there. http://mirror.centos.org/centos/6/sclo/x86_64/rh/git19/
Any update on this? I tried again tonight and mirror still fails while vault works.
If you need leading versions of git, is there a compelling reason not to use the RPM's from iusrelease? Those version are up to version 2.15.
On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 7:58 PM, BC centoslistmail@gmail.com wrote:
Any update on this? I tried again tonight and mirror still fails while vault works. _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 4:25 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia nkadel@gmail.com wrote:
If you need leading versions of git, is there a compelling reason not to use the RPM's from iusrelease? Those version are up to version 2.15.
This isn't about a specific version. It is about http://mirror.centos.org/centos/6/sclo/x86_64/rh/git19/ having RPMs that are not in the repodata.Looking closer, it seems the following dirs are also missing from the repodata:
devassist09 devtoolset-3 devtoolset-4 git19 mariadb55 maven30 mongodb24 mysql55 nginx16 nodejs010 perl516 php54 php55 postgresql92 python33 repodata rh-mariadb100 rh-maven33 rh-mongodb26 rh-mongodb30upg rh-mysql56 rh-nodejs4 rh-passenger40 rh-perl520 rh-php56 rh-postgresql94 rh-python34 rh-ror41 rh-ruby22 rh-thermostat16 ror40 ruby193 ruby200 thermostat1 v8314
I mention this because I saw no notice. One day they just disappeared from the repodata and it is curious that the RPMs themselves are still there.
On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 8:35 AM, BC centoslistmail@gmail.com wrote:
I mention this because I saw no notice. One day they just disappeared from the repodata and it is curious that the RPMs themselves are still there.
Is there any update on this? Is it broken and will be fixed? Is it intentional and a wontfix?
On 22/08/18 16:24, BC wrote:
On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 8:35 AM, BC centoslistmail@gmail.com wrote:
I mention this because I saw no notice. One day they just disappeared from the repodata and it is curious that the RPMs themselves are still there.
Is there any update on this? Is it broken and will be fixed? Is it intentional and a wontfix?
It is intentional that it has been removed from the metadata as those packages are no longer supported. What is not intentional is that the packages themselves keep re-appearing in the directories in the repo itself. The repodata is correct in not listing them, the fact that they still exist as files is not.
They're unsupported and should have been removed. The fact that you cannot install them as they're missing from the repodata is a good thing. The fact that the packages still exist (even though you cannot install them via yum) is not.
Trevor
On 08/22/2018 10:29 AM, Trevor Hemsley via CentOS-devel wrote:
On 22/08/18 16:24, BC wrote:
On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 8:35 AM, BC centoslistmail@gmail.com wrote:
I mention this because I saw no notice. One day they just disappeared from the repodata and it is curious that the RPMs themselves are still there.
Is there any update on this? Is it broken and will be fixed? Is it intentional and a wontfix?
It is intentional that it has been removed from the metadata as those packages are no longer supported. What is not intentional is that the packages themselves keep re-appearing in the directories in the repo itself. The repodata is correct in not listing them, the fact that they still exist as files is not.
They're unsupported and should have been removed. The fact that you cannot install them as they're missing from the repodata is a good thing. The fact that the packages still exist (even though you cannot install them via yum) is not.
If you look here, you will see when things have gone EOL .. they then get no more updates from upstream:
https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/rhscl
Continuing to carry those in our repos puts users at risk security wise, so they have been removed from the repodata. They will be removed from the tree at some later date, as this prevents their install and prevents security issues.
If this BREAKS something that is supported and not past its EOL as a dependency .. that is an issue that the SIG needs to know about so that they can research it and find a solution.
If you insist on using the potentially insecure versions past EOL, they are here:
http://vault.centos.org/7.4.1708/sclo/
(including their metadata)
Neither the CentOS team (or the SIG) have any control on when these items get to EOL. But, I don't think users want EOL items in normal directories that are nto getting security updates.
Thanks, Johnny Hughes
On Sat, Aug 25, 2018 at 7:12 AM Johnny Hughes johnny@centos.org wrote:
If you look here, you will see when things have gone EOL .. they then get no more updates from upstream:
Thanks for the link and explanation, Trevor and Johnny. I was just confused by the silent dropping of the repodata with the data still being there. I didn't know if it was a bug or not. I certainly have no qualms with moving to a newer git. :)
-
BC -
Johnny Hughes -
Nico Kadel-Garcia -
Trevor Hemsley