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

Re: "newer packages"



On 09/08/2009 03:56 PM, Steve Traylen wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 12:11 AM, Stephen John Smoogen<smooge gmail com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 12:16 PM, Kevin Fenzi<kevin scrye com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 8 Sep 2009 12:28:35 -0500 (CDT)
>>> Mike McGrath <mmcgrath redhat com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Should we have a stronger effort to replace older RHEL packages if we
>>>> put them in their own namespace and don't conflict?
>>>
>>> Well, how much interest is there in this?
>>> How many packages would we have?
>>>
> 
> One thing we often do at users/developers request is role say
> python2.5 to install along side the system python2.3.4 on say EL4 where
> we aim for it to  do no harm. Users have to explicitly call it.
> I'd be very happy to see and submit things like that.
> 
So the one problem with this is the logistics of also building new
python modules.  You probably don't just need python2.6-2.6.x, for
instance, you also need python-pycurl built against python2.6,
python-setuptools, TurboGears, et al.  This is not undoable, but it is a
package explosion.

-Toshio

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


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