J.Pilk at tesco
Mar 14, 2012, 4:05 AM
Post #3 of 3
On 13/03/12 22:40, John Pilkington wrote:
Re: Understanding the relationship of atrpms and atrpms-testing repos
[In reply to]
> On 13/03/12 21:03, Bob Lightfoot wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>> Dear Community:
>> I write this based on my recent experience with libvpx and what I
>> believe I now understand about the atrpms-testing repo. I must backup
>> and say that when working in the fedora community the name -testing on
>> a repo always meant something that could potentially break your fedora
>> system and be bug laden. I am slowly, yes thickheadedly learning Axel
>> and John that this is not the case with atrpm-testing repo. In the
>> RHEL/CentOS/SL world of atrpms-testing it simply means it is something
>> that replaces a file in the base distribution.
>> This brings me to my latest question. right now the command "yum
>> list installed | grep atrpms-testing" lists 10 rpms. I saw the other
>> day that there are several 30+ some mythtv packages in atrpms-testing
>> which would replace the base packages I have. Is my assumption that
>> these packages in -testing are stable and not liable to break a
>> working system accurate? Just asking for confirmation.
> I don't know what to say here. I have no official place in Axel's team
> but I'm a satisfied user and I try to help when I can. I certainly don't
> want to do the opposite.
> Earlier this week in the 'Update failure el6' thread Axel said:
>> libvpx.so.1 is in atrpms-testing. It replaces a package from the
>> vendor, so it is not allowed to go into stable.
>> You can temporarily enable the testing repo and try updating again.
> ...which suggests that some caution is still prudent. The more packages
> from testing you have, the more you stray from the RH-tested path - but
> without them you won't be able to run the extra goodies. I believe that
> packages in testing are in general closely based on ones that have been
> out in the wild in other distros for some time, but they must inevitably
> carry some extra risk. I doubt that many will be active in core
> 'enterprise' tasks, but if your insurer demands certification....
Having just looked at the el6-testing repo again I wonder if you were
actually enquiring about the mythtv 'bijou' packages that have just
arrived there. They provide a tweaked version of 0.24.2 and you can
read about them in Yeechang Lee's recent post here. I ran the version
that was here earlier and was happy with it.
I can't find any 0.25-related packages. Me too!
atrpms-users mailing list
atrpms-users [at] atrpms