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

Re: PackageKit major annoyances

On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 12:50 PM, Mark <markg85 gmail com> wrote:
> I don't know if i'm gonna put that effort in it. I don't like
> packagekit that much

if people don't make the effort, then it won't be changed.  You made
the effort to write your original post. You made the effort to reply.
If you are going to bother writing anything at all, the least I can do
is take the time to make the effort to make sure you are writing to
the write place to have an impact.

> It's in the spec file defined as "Name: <<the name>>"
packagename-version-release.arch   packagename is <<the name>>  the
information is there its just not the bolded part.
> I see 2 identical names and descriptions just a different architecture
64bit system. They are not duplicates. How does PK know if you want
the 32bit or the 64bit version of a package?

> I don't have anything called: "Authorizations" in the
> System->Administration menu.

my mistake  System->Preference->System->Authorizations

> I don't want nor need that kind of power. (nice to have though) the
> default policies should just be right in a released "stable" product
> (fedora 10) if they aren't then it's beta/rc and doesn't belong here,

I don't think your personal preference nor mine gets to define the
'right' defaults.  Defaults are a matter of reasoned discussion and
must balance several factors.  There is an argument to be made that
the one time importing of a repository key into the rpm keyring is a
sensitive enough action and infrequent enough to require an
administrator's authorization as a default policy.


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