[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Prepackaged configurations



On Sat, 22 May 2004, Havoc Pennington wrote:

> G. meta-packages. e.g. have a package x-terminal-client that depends
>    on some set of other packages, provides certain config files, 
>    etc.
>   
>    The obvious problem is that the gdm package provides 
>    gdm.conf, so how does a meta-package install a different 
>    gdm.conf. If every important daemon/feature supported a 
>    conf.d with override files in it, that might answer the 
>    question, but sadly that isn't the norm.
>
> H. Some sort of RPM changes. Presumably we could make RPM smart
>    about this problem in some way. I don't have concrete ideas.
>
>Obviously, this is far from fully thought-out at this point, I'm just
>trying to start the thread. It looks pretty likely to me that our
>solution will be a pragmatic compromise that isn't quite ideal. But
>which compromise is the best one?
>

I will say:

Here, here! This is definately would be very useful. I think it will 
take a bit of many of the items you have listed above, and should be 
approached also in a systematic way.

FC3 -- documentation (complete by FC6)
FC4 -- breaking RPMS more into seperate
         executables
           bare-essentials, but requires some sort of config.
         documentation
         configuration
           bare-config, specific1-config, specific2-config, etc
            all provide package-config which is required by bare 
       (complete by FC7)
FC5 -- better metapackage groupings (complete by FC8)


-- 
Stephen John Smoogen		smoogen lanl gov
Los Alamos National Lab  CCN-5 Sched 5/40  PH: 4-0645
Ta-03 SM-1498 MailStop B255 DP 10S  Los Alamos, NM 87545
-- You should consider any operational computer to be a security problem --



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]