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

Re: Agressive FUD by Fedora contributor



On 10/16/06, Axel Thimm <Axel Thimm atrpms net> wrote:
On Sun, Oct 15, 2006 at 06:15:56PM -0700, Christopher Stone wrote:
> As an experiment, I added the ATrpms repository to my
> /etc/yum.repos.d/ directory and ran yum check-update.  In theory,
> adding a new repository and running check-update should not list ANY
> packages, however this is what check-update listed as needing
> updating:

So? ATrpms has some needs to replace some core packages. Does this
break your system?  No, it does not.

ATrpms replaces many packages which it does not need to replace (I'm
almost certain of this considering how many packages it replaces).

You should not replace core packages in your repository.  Instead you
should file bug reports against the packages in FC/FE which you need
to replace in order to fix them so they don't need to be replaced.  If
there is *anybody* on this mailing list that disagrees with this
statement, please speak up.  I doubt anyone will.

> I'm not sure how many of these packages are actually FC/FE packages,

Any package with a multimedia stamp on it is known not to be part of
FC. Don't add overlaps between ATrpms and other non-FC repos to
magnify your argument.

If I wanted to magnify my argument I would have listed the 20-30
additional packages that show up when I do a "yum update" and it
brings in all the dependencies as well.  There are so many packages
you override that attempting to magnify it would be a waste of my
time.


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