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

Re: kernel-devel: should yum install, not update?

Hash: SHA1

Axel Thimm wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 22, 2005 at 10:33:05PM -0600, Michael Favia wrote:
>>Dave Jones wrote:
>>>On Sat, Jan 22, 2005 at 03:22:53PM -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
>>> > Providing 'kernel-modules' on the other hand... i don't think anything
>>> > requires 'kernel-modules' so it might be okay to make kernel-devel
>>> > provide that but i still seems to me like potential double-meaning to
>>> > what 'kernel-modules' means since kernel-devel doesnt actually include
>>> > a single kernel-module.
>>> > 
>>> > Maybe  Dave Jones can be poked into making a comment about this.
>>>Adding either of the provides seems like a rather ugly hack.
>>>up2date already has the smarts to installonly the -devel package,
>>>so I'm of the opinion yum should be fixed to do the right thing too.
>>>Jeremy is rebuilding yum as I type for tomorrows rawhide to
>>>take care of this issue.
>>Yes but the real question is "Where does this information belong?" I
>>dont think that these things should be managed ad-hoc by each competing
>>package manager but instead internalized into the packages themselves
>>somehow for scalabiltiy and adaptability purposes.
> It has often been suggested to add a new rpm tag for this
> purpose. E.g. you could have
> UpdateMode: (installation|alwaysupgrade)
> or
> AutoUpgrade: no
> rpm 4.4 would be a good candidate to get this in.

this sounds like a much more reasonable solution (in any form it takes)
than making each depsolver take on the task individually.

- --
Michael Favia            michael favia insitesinc com
Insites Incorporated    http://michael.insitesinc.com
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)


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