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

Re: redhat abe

On Fri, 2005-01-28 at 12:30 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 11:34:09 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > Technically, I don't see any need for apt to adopt yum's repodata
> > format. Politically, this requirement is introduced by RH not wanting to
> > add apt-repositories and fedora.us apparently being unable to set up
> > complete repositories.
> Unless I'm misinformed, fedora.us even provides an apt-repository for
> pre-extras. What do you mean with "unable to set up complete
> repositories"?
SRPMS apt-repositories are missing for pre-extras.

This renders "apt-get source" and "apt-get build-dep" non-applicable to
fedora.us hosted apt-repositories and therefore voids at least these
aspects where apt is superior to yum.

I had asked Warren Togami to add them on PM and he answered:
"There is little good reason to do so.  Trying to limit the size of that
repository because many mirror administrators see it as redundant."

This is not true, SRPMS apt-repositories are not redundant. Not having
them implies loss of functionality to apt.

As Fedora.US had supplied SRPMS apt-repositories for FC < 3, omitting
them for pre-extras also means a regression in functionality of
fedora.us having been introduced with the switch from FE2 to pre-


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