3 ms·
It's not about RH packages directly. They are fine. As it is with universe on ubuntu, you quite likely need epel on rhel for doing quite a lot of basic stuff. I
by bubblethink 8y ago
It's not about RH packages directly. They are fine. As it is with universe on ubuntu, you quite likely need epel on rhel for doing quite a lot of basic stuff. If you are able to get by with just the proper supported packages in each distro, this doesn't affect you. And that's where the two diverge. universe is in better shape since it is semi-official, v/s epel which is completely unofficial/community-based.
- Conan_Kudo 8y agoActually, since EPEL is often backports from Fedora, many people elect to keep them up to date with what's shipped in Fedora, so it tends to do better than other counterparts. The closest counterpart is SUSE's PackageHub, which is often seeded by stuff going into openSUSE Leap that isn't part of SLE itself.
- bubblethink 8y agoJust saw your other comment about Fedora. Thanks for Fedora and EPEL. I was just pointing out that EPEL would benefit from some recognition as a semi-official but ultimately unsupported repo from RH. Technically RH already has 'optional' channels which are already in that category, but EPEL should really be that. Some communication channel between RH and EPEL and QA so that stuff doesn't break on RHEL point releases and maybe some resources for security updates would go a long way in making RHEL more usable.
- Conan_Kudo 8y agoWe'd all love that. It's funny, because Red Hat does regularly source content from EPEL to pull into RHEL for various products, which is where these issues come from. I would love it if Red Hat were to give it proper recognition. I honestly don't know why they haven't yet...
- mattdm 8y agoAre you a RHEL customer? If so, telling your salespeople this would not hurt. Just sayin' :)