mutt and squid, removed because of dep problems, errors

[Sandy Pond]

On Wed, 2004-03-17 at 07:42 -0500, Jim Cornette wrote: 
> Removing packages that have dep problems, is by no means a solution for 
> resolving conflicts, with other programs. I don't think doing a nodep is 
> a good practice either.

This is really a custom situation that depends on many things.

> For nautilus-media removal, it was more of a test to satisfy other media 
> applications and on Sandy's detective work on pinning down 
> nautilus-media as the offending application.

This is real easy if you use "yum provides <file>" and "yum list
<package>" after a dependency failure.  Maybe yum could do a better job
of doing an automatic "provide" and "list" when it encounters a
dependency problem. 

> If this wasn't a test process and things weren't changing so quickly. It 
> would be better to submit a bug for the problems encountered. However, 
> without the postings related to the conflicts, it is hard for people to 
> know what is really going on. One problem, many solutions.
> 

This is really a custom situation that depends on many things.

> 
> Regarding the mutt and squid conflict. I use mutt and don't think that I 
> use squid. Removing this program was with much hesitation.
> 

Case in point.

:)