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

Re: Conflicts · Re: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm



On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 09:44:40 -0800, Jeff Spaleta wrote:

> > Still not true. There are exceptions. Else a few current Fedora
> > packages, which conflict explicitly, could not be in the collection.
> > Other packages live on happily with bugs filed but no fix for a very
> > long time.
> >
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Conflicts
> 
> 
> Exceptions prove the rule. However, in the case of rpm and other
> pieces of technology we acknowledge as critical, I think we have to be
> exceedingly careful.  We must insist that secondary implementations in
> fedora avoid conflicts with the primary implementation that the
> distribution relies on.

Yes.

And my quoted paragraph above was no plead for allowing rpm5.org to
replace rpm.org in Fedora. It only showed that at the packaging-level
it is possible to have explicit conflicts, and some are even between
alternative implementations of libraries.


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