Based on the office hour earlier this week, I spent some time performing scans of the PowerTools repo to see what packages from BaseOS, AppStream, and EPEL rely on it.
The results of these scans can be found in a repo here: https://gitlab.com/omenos/crb-depends
I was only able to do x86 based scans, and there will be some dupes of packages because i686 and x86_64 versions exist. Unfortunately this is a pretty basic check; I didn't differentiate between package types during cleanup, so there will be a lot of -devel packages showing up.
Hopefully the data is accurate, I did this fairly late at night :)
On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 10:14 AM Mike Rochefort mroche@redhat.com wrote:
Hopefully the data is accurate, I did this fairly late at night :)
I probably should have done some more validation before sending this off. There are packages in PowerTools that are also in AppStream (leptonica for example). So in those cases PowerTools doesn't really get pulled into play. And personally speaking I would ignore all the i686 packages, I don't think they're fully accurate in the depends.
On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 10:33:12AM -0400, Mike Rochefort wrote:
On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 10:14 AM Mike Rochefort mroche@redhat.com wrote:
Hopefully the data is accurate, I did this fairly late at night :)
I probably should have done some more validation before sending this off. There are packages in PowerTools that are also in AppStream (leptonica for example). So in those cases PowerTools doesn't really get pulled into play. And personally speaking I would ignore all the i686 packages, I don't think they're fully accurate in the depends.
Thanks for doing this Mike! I'm composing the Bugzilla issue right now, so that data is really useful and I'll reference it.
Um... how do packages end up in two Red Hat repos? When EPEL packages get shipped in RHEL/CentOS they end up being retired in EPEL, so I'm assuming in this case packages in PowerTools were meant to be retired when they land in AppStream?
Best regards,
Hi all,
On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 10:14:22AM -0400, Mike Rochefort wrote:
Based on the office hour earlier this week, I spent some time performing scans of the PowerTools repo to see what packages from BaseOS, AppStream, and EPEL rely on it.
The results of these scans can be found in a repo here: https://gitlab.com/omenos/crb-depends
I have filed the issue proposing a separate subpackage for CRB/Powertools, that virtually provide 'repo(CRB)' so that `epel-release` can recommend it; this way, distributions such as CentOS Stream or Alma can have this repo automatically enabled when installing epel-release, while RHEL customers will have an unchanged experience so there is no risk of giving the appearance that CRB is supported:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1983216
Looking forward to discussing this, or other potential solutions, in this thread.
Best regards,
On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 4:15 PM Michel Alexandre Salim via CentOS-devel centos-devel@centos.org wrote:
Um... how do packages end up in two Red Hat repos? When EPEL packages get shipped in RHEL/CentOS they end up being retired in EPEL, so I'm assuming in this case packages in PowerTools were meant to be retired when they land in AppStream?
I think this is due to me using the CentOS Stream 8 image. I just pulled the standard CentOS 8.4 image and the package I mentioned before is only in PowerTools. I would expect those packages be removed from PowerTools. This shouldn't cause a major issue in the long run from what I can see, but it will make things 'fun' to check when using Stream as the platform to check things against.
On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 4:56 PM Michel Alexandre Salim via CentOS-devel centos-devel@centos.org wrote:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1983216
Looking forward to discussing this, or other potential solutions, in this thread.
Thanks for filing this, Michel!
-
Michel Alexandre Salim -
Mike Rochefort