[CentOS-devel] NGINX cannot be installed. Possible to include libunwind in CentOS-Base?

[Johnny Hughes]

On 12/09/2015 08:10 AM, Jamie Nguyen wrote:
> On 09/12/15 13:58, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>> CentOS doesn't consider it anything.  EPEL is written for RHEL and they
>> have published the stuff for 7.2 already.
>>
>> CentOS Linux is run by 5 guys and a volunteer QA team.  We have not
>> finished the 7.2.1511 upgrade cycle yet.
> 
> Hi, I think you misunderstood what I was trying to say. I'm definitely
> not trying to rush CentOS developers into releasing 7.2. I was trying to
> see if libunwind could be included in the CentOS 7.1 repositories.
> 
>> CentOS does not have any control over what EPEL does.
> 
> I don't expect or require CentOS to have any control over EPEL. (Perhaps
> you misunderstood and thought I thought I was asking about pushing
> libunwind to EPEL?)
> 
>> When we get the release done, it will work.  Until then you can use CR
>> if you want.
>>
>> And in case this has not been said before, libunwind was added to RHEL
>> in 7,2, so will be part of the new release of CentOS Linux when we are
>> done .. it was therefore removed from EPEL.
> 
> That's exactly what I said in my first email in this thread.
> 

Thanks Jamie,

Sorry for being short before.  We are working flat out trying to get
7.2.1511 out the door.

As background.  I am kind of hesitant to break the linunwind that we are
going to release in the new CentOS tree while this bug is being sorted
out that the EPEL version is newer than the RHEL 7.2 version here:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1288313

I know you are on that bug as well.

My issue with putting the EPEL version in CentOS Extras is that then
when we release 7.2.1511 it will be newer than the version in our OS
tree until Red Hat does their epoch thing as discussed on the bug.

Obviously they don't want to use the new version if libunwind from EPEL,
if that were going to he the course of action, I would do it.  Since it
is not, and they want the current version tehy have in RHEL 7.2, I would
rather wait.  Does this make sense?

We hope to have the actual 7.2.1511 tree syncing to the mirrors in a day
or so.  What we are currently working on is the impact of the new
Security Profiles and getting our ISO package lists updated for that
after we got it debranded.  I think we are close on that, and we have
solved numerous other issues and I don't see any blockers to release
right now.

Of course, that is not a guarantee, something else might come up, but I
think we are very close.

If it looks like we are going to delay past this weekend at least
getting the tree's on te mirrors (because we find issues), then we can
look at this issue again.

Thanks,
Johnny Hughes

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20151209/98f6ad80/attachment.sig>