....are you trying to install RHEL7 packages on RHEL6.6?

No, I am trying to install RHEL7 packages on RHEL7 only.
Ignore the 1st step in Description:

Steps to Reproduce:
1.Install RHEL7.1
2.Install glusterfs downstream build
3.Install downstream samba build for RHEl7

Still see following dependency error while installing samba-pidl package.

---> Package samba-pidl.noarch 0:4.1.17-7.el7rhgs will be installed
--> Processing Dependency: perl(Parse::Yapp::Driver) for package: samba-pidl-4.1.17-7.el7rhgs.noarch
--> Processing Dependency: perl(Parse::Yapp) for package: samba-pidl-4.1.17-7.el7rhgs.noarch
--> Finished Dependency Resolution
Error: Package: samba-pidl-4.1.17-7.el7rhgs.noarch (rhgs3.1-samba-latest-el7)
           Requires: perl(Parse::Yapp::Driver)
Error: Package: samba-pidl-4.1.17-7.el7rhgs.noarch (rhgs3.1-samba-latest-el7)
           Requires: perl(Parse::Yapp)
 You could try using --skip-broken to work around the problem
 You could try running: rpm -Va --nofiles --nodigest

Did some more testing and analysis on this and found that the package perl-Parse-Yapp is not part of rhel-7-server repo and it is part of rhel-7-server optional repo.

Other dependencies are present in rhel-7-server repo.

To install samba-pidl we need this perl package so we need to build this for rhgs3.1.

(In reply to surabhi from comment #5)
> Did some more testing and analysis on this and found that the package
> perl-Parse-Yapp is not part of rhel-7-server repo and it is part of
> rhel-7-server optional repo.
> 
> Other dependencies are present in rhel-7-server repo.
> 
> To install samba-pidl we need this perl package so we need to build this for
> rhgs3.1.

We probably need not *build* this for RHGS 3.1, we may need to ship it to the RHGS 3 samba repo for RHEL7

samba-pidl isn't a requirement of any other package, so the only reason to install it is purely for devel work. We see a few options available, I present them here in ranked order of preference/cleanliness:

 1. Force users to include the RHEL 7 Optional channel if they want to do development work. I imagine all RHS customers should have subscriptions for RHEL 7 Optional?
 2. Include the necessary PERL packages in the base RHGS channel. We don't want to clutter the RHS-SMB channel with anything that isn't strictly Samba-related, at least not yet if we can help it.
 3. Include the necessary PERL packages in the RHS-SMB channel.

Any of these would work, it's just a matter of what makes sense for our product and our customers.

(In reply to Jose A. Rivera from comment #7)
> samba-pidl isn't a requirement of any other package, so the only reason to
> install it is purely for devel work. We see a few options available, I
> present them here in ranked order of preference/cleanliness:
> 

Ah! This is to help one of your own kind. ;-)

Is the devel work relevant from an RHGS customer point of view ?

>  1. Force users to include the RHEL 7 Optional channel if they want to do
> development work. I imagine all RHS customers should have subscriptions for
> RHEL 7 Optional?

If the samba-pidl is shipped in the RHGS related repos, then its dependency should also be available in the RHGS related repos. We cannot ship a dependency broken package in the RHGS related repos, even if its dependent package might be in some other repo unrelated to RHGS.

>  2. Include the necessary PERL packages in the base RHGS channel. We don't
> want to clutter the RHS-SMB channel with anything that isn't strictly
> Samba-related, at least not yet if we can help it.

I do not understand the logic here. We could ship the necessary PERL packages in the base RHGS channel if the package is of common use to some other component of RHGS as well, such as with pacemaker and corosync packages.

Otherwise, if the reason to ship it at the RHGS channel is just to reduce clutter at the RHS-SMB channel, is it not introducing clutter at the RHGS channel then ? And also, if it is shipped at the RHGS channel, it is possible that it may get installed by chance on an RHGS node which does not use gluster samba, and in future complicate package management on that node.

>  3. Include the necessary PERL packages in the RHS-SMB channel.
> 

This seems to be the best choice to me if we need to ship the samba-pidl package at all on RHEL7.

> Any of these would work, it's just a matter of what makes sense for our
> product and our customers.

(In reply to Rejy M Cyriac from comment #8)
> (In reply to Jose A. Rivera from comment #7)
> >  3. Include the necessary PERL packages in the RHS-SMB channel.
> > 
> 
> This seems to be the best choice to me if we need to ship the samba-pidl
> package at all on RHEL7.

Eh, not the worst idea. :) 

Though I dug a bit deeper and, supposedly, NOTHING ELSE depends on the PERL package in question (perl-Parse-Yapp)? Can someone please verify if that's true? I ran "repoquery --whatrequires perl-Parse-Yapp" on an RHS system I have installed, but... is that right? Can someone maybe run this on a RHEL box with all channels activated?

Based on discussion with Rejy and Surabhi, Got this added to the samba rhel 7 errata: perl-Parse-Yapp-1.05-50.el7

On RHEL7 With perl-Parse-Yapp-1.05-50.el7 available in samba repo, the samba-pidl package is installed without any dependency issues.
Marking the BZ to verified.

Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2015-1495.html