[CentOS] nodejs, epel, SCL

Mon Jun 2 13:53:53 UTC 2014
Jim Perrin <jperrin at centos.org>

On 06/02/2014 07:47 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 6:55 AM, Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org> wrote:
>> On 05/30/2014 01:58 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>>> Is yum supposed to track the dependencies separately?   That is, if an
>>> EPEL package requires some other package (expected with the stock
>>> paths), can an SCL package fulfill that dependency even though it will
>>> be installed in a location that won't work?
>> SCL's require that you properly configure them to work with the system
>> ... you CAN likely use that version IF you modify the environment for
>> the program in question.  Or you can use the EPEL version and exclude
>> nodejs010 from the SCL's .repo file in /etc/yum.repo.d/
>> SCL's are not automatically set up, as they are designed to only be used
>> when properly configured and should live alongside other older
>> packages.  As such, they require added knowledge and administrative
>> overhead, much like multiple 3rd party repos can ... but they also
>> provide lots of added capabilities.
> That seems pretty dangerous if the packages replace standard or EPEL
> libraries/components.   I'd have expected them to have some sort of
> namespace concept for dependencies to keep the sets of packages
> completely independent.   That is, I thought being independent was the
> point.   Shouldn't you be able to have multiple versions installed?

I consider this a bug, as the SCL's should be self-contained. We'd need
to see if this occurs upstream as well, and then file a bug there if so.

Jim Perrin
The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org
twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77