SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS Archives

May 2011

SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS@LISTSERV.FNAL.GOV
Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
Mailling list for Scientific Linux users worldwide <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 18 May 2011 09:34:58 -0600
Reply-To:
Orion Poplawski <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
Subject:
Re: SL vs. RPMForge repo
From:
Orion Poplawski <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
In-Reply-To:
<[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version:
1.0
Comments:
To: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (20 lines) 
On 04/13/2011 02:00 PM, Phil Schaffner wrote:
>
> Personally ELRepo and RPMforge are my first choices, and I find Adobe is
> pretty safe. If I can't find what I'm looking for there I will venture (with
> extra caution) to EPEL and finally ATrpms.
>
> Phil

Just curious - why do you feel the need to treat EPEL with extra caution?  I 
happen to have reversed feeling about EPEL/RPMforge.  I note that out of the 
box RPMforge will replace some system packages (perhaps without any problems), 
something EPEL avoids.

-- 
Orion Poplawski
Technical Manager                     303-415-9701 x222
NWRA/CoRA Division                    FAX: 303-415-9702
3380 Mitchell Lane                  [log in to unmask]
Boulder, CO 80301              http://www.cora.nwra.com

ATOM RSS1 RSS2