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

RE: PackageKit major annoyances




> -----Original Message-----
> From: fedora-list-bounces redhat com [mailto:fedora-list-
> bounces redhat com] On Behalf Of Jeff Spaleta
> Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2008 5:02 PM
> To: Community assistance, encouragement,and advice for using Fedora.
> Subject: 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?
The argument is that an user who doesn't know the difference between 64bit
and 32bit will be confused and 99.9% of the time will just want 64bit
packages unless someone tells them to get a 32bit one (or there's no 64bit
package available). People like me who need 32bit packages for certain
compatibilities already know how to get them manually.

> 
> > 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.
The argument could be made that any time a key is being imported,
authorization had to have been given to install packages in the first place,
probably a few seconds ago.

> 
> -jef
> 
> --
> fedora-list mailing list
> fedora-list redhat com
> To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
> Guidelines:
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
-Dan


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