[CentOS] BackupPC v4 from epel

[Fabian Arrotin]

On 16/10/2019 09:07, Alessandro Baggi wrote:
> On 16/10/19 02:31, Ranbir wrote:
>> Hello Everyone,
>>
>> Has anyone tried to install BackupPC v4 on CentOS 8 from epel? I just
>> did and this happened:
>>
>> [root at resurrect ~]# dnf --enablerepo epel install BackupPC
>> Last metadata expiration check: 0:18:41 ago on Tue 15 Oct 2019
>> 08:03:59 PM EDT.
>> Error:
>>   Problem: conflicting requests
>>    - nothing provides par2cmdline needed by BackupPC-4.3.1-2.el8.x86_64
>>    - nothing provides perl(Net::FTP::AutoReconnect) needed by
>> BackupPC-4.3.1-2.el8.x86_64
>>    - nothing provides perl(Net::FTP::RetrHandle) needed by
>> BackupPC-4.3.1-2.el8.x86_64
>>    - nothing provides perl(Time::ParseDate) needed by
>> BackupPC-4.3.1-2.el8.x86_64
>>    - nothing provides perl(XML::RSS) needed by
>> BackupPC-4.3.1-2.el8.x86_64
>>    - nothing provides perl-Time-modules needed by
>> BackupPC-4.3.1-2.el8.x86_64
>> (try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages or
>> '--nobest' to use not only best candidate packages)
>>
>> If that didn't come out too nice, here's a pastebin link:
>>
>> https://pastebin.com/HgjAQmvV
>>
>> I've checked all the disabled repos on my system and none of them have
>> those packages. Is this just a case of the dependencies not being built
>> yet?
>>
>>
> 
> Hi Ranbir,
> 
> as you said this could be a list of deps not yet released. If your
> machine is a "testing machine" you can try to enable epel-testing and
> epel-playground and check if those deps are in those supplementary
> repos. Caution because they are testing repos so if you need to use on
> production wait releases.
> 
> Hope that helps.

It seems EPEL doesn't use a repoclosure test when pushing from testing
to stable.
Let me just take one simple example : I recently asked a pkg to be built
for epel 8 (see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1755787)

So that package itself was able to be built, and despite the fact that
it was mentioned that it has some Requires: issues (see two other
reports in the original one), it was still pushed from -testing to
stable , so actually you can see it :

Available Packages
lollypop.noarch                                        1.1.97.3-1.el8
                                     epel

But it's not installable (obviously) :
Problem: conflicting requests
  - nothing provides kid3-common needed by lollypop-1.1.97.3-1.el8.noarch
  - nothing provides python3-pylast needed by lollypop-1.1.97.3-1.el8.noarch

Stephen (smooge) would probably be able to comment if that would be
possible for Epel to have some gating from -testing to stable (like a
simple repoclosure test) to see if packages pushed to stable can be
installable (and so satisfied deps in stable repo too)


-- 
Fabian Arrotin
The CentOS Project | https://www.centos.org
gpg key: 17F3B7A1 | twitter: @arrfab

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20191016/adea6fd8/attachment.sig>