Bug 710082

Summary:	Request to add dhcp package to EPEL
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Andreas Muehlemann <amuehlem>
Component:	dhcp	Assignee:	Jiri Popelka <jpopelka>
Status:	CLOSED WONTFIX	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	unspecified	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	15	CC:	jpopelka, ovasik
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2011-06-02 14:10:34 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:

Description Andreas Muehlemann 2011-06-02 12:18:15 UTC

Hi!

Your package dhcp-4.2.1-4.P1 is part of Fedora but not included in EPEL (Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux). I'm looking for this package to be used on CentOS 5 and would like to ask if you intend to build your package for EPEL.

If you are interested in building, please follow the Branching
Procedure[3]  for EPEL.

If you maintain several packages (> 2) you can also use a scripted
branching method (all packages from a contributor) by using the
Scripted Branch Process[4] .

If you are not interested in EPEL or don't feel like you have the time
to put your packages into EPEL, the EPEL project would like to request
that a co-maintainer who is a part of EPEL be added to your packages.
To do this, please follow the co-maintainer process[5] .

Best regards
Andreas


[1]  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL

[2]  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/ContributorStatus

[3]  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CVSAdminProcedure

[4]  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MichaelStahnke/ScriptedBranchProcess

[5]  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Policy/EncourageComaintainership

Comment 1 Jiri Popelka 2011-06-02 13:26:31 UTC

I don't think we are able to ship dhcp-4.2 with EPEL 5.
dhcp-4.2 includes an implementation of dynamic DNS updates.
It uses libraries from BIND and, to avoid issues with
different versions, includes the necessary BIND version.
Problem is that we can't built against this local copy of BIND libraries, see:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Duplication_of_system_libraries

To build against system BIND libraries we would mostly likely need to get BIND-9.8 (as it is now in F15) to EPEL. But that would be too much work for almost nothing.

I would rather see dhcp-4.1 than dhcp-4.2 in EPEL5.
Either 4.1.1-P1 as shipped with RHEL-6 or 4.1-ESV (will be supported by ISC till November 2013) as shipped with F13.

I had already proved that dhcp-4.1 can be build in RHEL-5, see:
https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/dhcp-users/2010-July/011681.html

Comment 2 Ondrej Vasik 2011-06-02 13:47:10 UTC

Additionally, one of the epel rules is to not ship newer version in epel than is in RHEL. And dhcp-3.0.5-29.el5 is in RHEL-5...

Comment 3 Jiri Popelka 2011-06-02 14:10:34 UTC

Yes, Ondrej is right, see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL
"EPEL packages are usually based on their Fedora counterparts and will never conflict with or replace packages in the base Enterprise Linux distributions."

Closing as WONTFIX then.

The work-around is described in
https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/dhcp-users/2010-July/011681.html

Comment 4 Jiri Popelka 2011-09-08 11:37:09 UTC

I've updated the source rpm for RHEL-5 to dhcp-4.1-ESV-R3.
https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/dhcp-users/2011-September/013620.html