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
SRPMS apt-repositories are missing for pre-extras.
This renders "apt-get source" and "apt-get build-dep" non-applicable
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-