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 09:02:10 -0700
Reply-To:
Akemi Yagi <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
quoted-printable
Subject:
Re: SL vs. RPMForge repo
From:
Akemi Yagi <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
In-Reply-To:
<[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version:
1.0
Comments:
To: Orion Poplawski <[log in to unmask]> cc: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (25 lines) 
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Orion Poplawski <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>> RPMforge now offers two repos - [rpmforge] and [rpmforge-extras].
>> Packages in [rpmforge] will not have conflict with the distro ones
>> whereas those in [rpmforge-extras] may overwrite distro files.
>>
>> Akemi
>
> AH yes, forgot about that.  I guess the packages it is wanting to replace on
> my machine mostly come from EPEL, not the SL repositories.
>
> But there is one:
>
> # yum list environment-modules
> Loaded plugins: downloadonly
> Installed Packages
> environment-modules.x86_64     3.2.7b-6.el6
> @anaconda-ScientificLinux-201102250955.x86_64
> Available Packages
> environment-modules.x86_64     3.2.8a-1.el6.rf     rpmforge

That one must have been missed. I will let Dag know. Thanks for reporting.

Akemi

ATOM RSS1 RSS2