James Antill wrote:
On Mon, 2008-09-15 at 13:02 -0400, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
> The question is: if one could throw RPM away and design a new one, could one
> do significantly better?
Of course one could, the relevant question is _how long_ would it take.
And could it be done faster by just fixing rpm, and I've not seen any
compelling arguments that it would be faster to throw away what we have.
I made it very clear in my mail that I'm not suggesting that we should throw
RPM away. The question I asked is supposed to give one an idea of how much of
the problem is caused by the current implementation as opposed to the inherent
complexity of the problem.
> Lets look back at the problem at hand: we all agree that
custom-installed
> glob-matched post-transaction triggers are useful things. I think I can also
> say that we agree that it should be in the lowest-level package management
> system. What has been up to debate so far is whether that lowest-level is
> RPM, or that RPM is a lost case and yum is considered the lowest-level.
That is a severe mis-reading of the discussion, the question is given
that rpm+yum are currently how all Fedora users manage their system. Do
we want to still require that all packaging problems should be solved at
the rpm layer, or should we try to move up and allow some more of the
problems to be solved at the yum layer.
There are many advantages to doing this, including just plain ease of
implementation. The only real disadvantage is that apt/smart/zypp/etc.
will become even more of a second class citizen in Fedora than they
already are (although I'm confident that the change proposed by Seth
could easily be ported to work in all of the above).
What exactly in my paragraph you quotes is "a severe mis-reading of the
discussion"? You say the exact same thing as I did except that instead of
calling RPM a lost case as I did, you call this approach making
apt/smart/zypp/etc. even more of a second class citizen. End result is the
same pig: use yum or be screwed.
You and Seth seem to be on the camp that thinks it's no big deal if one uses
RPM directly and gets into a suboptimal state. Some of us think that that's
unacceptable. We disagree and that's fine. Whoever ends up doing the work
decides what to do. I fully understand that and don't mean to imply what
people should be working on. Hope I've made myself clear this time.
behdad