SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS Archives

March 2015

SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS@LISTSERV.FNAL.GOV

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Steve Gaarder <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Steve Gaarder <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 27 Mar 2015 10:47:01 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (31 lines)
On Fri, 27 Mar 2015, Steve Gaarder wrote:

> On Fri, 27 Mar 2015, John Pilkington wrote:
>
>>  But my original point was that glib2-2.36.3-5, which I see in SL7x, was
>>  incompatible with the new (in epel-testing) qtwebkit, which needed
>>  glib2-2.40.0-4 from SL7rolling built off TUV's 7.1
>>
>>  It seems that what I see as SL7x is still 7.0.  The naming of the download
>>  sites may have me confused.  I'm using yumex.
>
> I see this also with libgtop2.  I currently cannot install the Mate
> group because the packages in EPEL require libgtop-2.0.so.10, which is
> in the package libgtop2-2.28.4-7.el7.x86_64.rpm, which in turn is only
> in SL7rolling.  This suggests that EPEL is built against 7rolling,
> which seems like a really bad idea.
>

Thinking about this some more, I assume that EPEL is actually built 
against the latest from TUV, so 7.1 in this case.  Correct?  If that is 
true, then I just need to be patient and wait for SL to release 7.1.  Then 
the question is: how patient do I need to be?

thanks,

Steve Gaarder
System Administrator, Dept of Mathematics
Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA
[log in to unmask]
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2