Hi Jaromir 
    
I need to take a deeper look at this since I'm already hitting
      violation in Fedora package guidelines so the spec files are not
      up to "spec" as ironic as that sounds and I need those to be up to
      specs before RHEL/CentOS 8 get's releases if we decided here at
      ISNIC to migrate to FRED ;)
    
I made sure when I handled the legacy sys-v migration to type
      systemd units in the distribution that no new legacy sys-v
      initscripts would be added and all major linux distributions
      should have made the systemd service manager the default init
      system by now and have deprecate legacy sysv initscripts (  with
      the exception of Debian due to it's Hurd/kFreeBSD part of it's
      community ) so by shipping an legacy initscript you ( read as an
      upstream or downstream packager ) have added direct ( unnecessary
      ) dependency on legacy sysv ( assuming you have packaged it
      correctly thou many packagers in Fedora just wrongly assumed
      certain components existed there indefinitely, which made in
      longer, harder and more painful to make changes on the core/baseOS
      level )  .
    
As an upstream you should ship only type unit files (
      service,timers etc ) upstream and have those downstream that still
      use legacy sys v initscript maintain their own ( or keep it in a
      separated downstream package with correct dependency and
      requirements on legacy sysv init and cron component for cron jobs
      ). 
    
That said I'm going to see if I cant find the time to review this
      is and make some pull request to fix this unless there is some
      specific reason why you ( as an upstream ) are still shipping
      legacy sysv initscripts.  ( thou the documentation [1] clearly
      mentions type systemd units as in  fred-rifd.service which btw
      is not being shipped with those components in the corp repository
      ). 
    
Unfortunately there are still some downstream distribution
      shenanigans related to the core/basesOS setup like different
      package names and file and directory names ( like apache vs httpd
      or /etc/sysconfig which is RH specific nonsense ) which creates
      administrative/end users confusion and unnecessary load on
      upstream communities ( support/documentation etc ). 
    
I'll keep going through this and testing this and will file pull-request for any issues I find and need fixing.
Regards
Jóhann B.
1.
      https://fred.nic.cz/documentation/html/AdminManual/Configuration.html
    
Hi Jóhann, we have a delay in publication of new version FRED-2.38 that is now in the QA process. This new version will include packages for Fedora 29. Last release candidate packages are available at the build server: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/jtalir/fred/monitor/ If you want to test this release candidate packages, you can attach this repository via: $ dnf copr enable jtalir/fred After this you can install Fred the same way as described on the website. I still need to verify installation procedure so I'll be happy if you will give me feedback how it worked. Regards, Jaromir On Thu, 2019-01-03 at 10:40 +0000, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:Greetings Fedora 29 got officially released on 30 October last year but no packages have been built for that release [1] as of today hence installation on the distro fails with.... Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'fred', ignoring this repo. No match for argument: fred-* Any particular reason the components have not been built for the 29 release of Fedora? Regards Jóhann B. 1. http://archive.nic.cz/yum/fred/fedora/ _______________________________________________ fred-users mailing list fred-users@lists.nic.cz https://lists.nic.cz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fred-users