On Fri, 17 Dec 2004, Ken Snider wrote:
Dag Wieers wrote:
> Removing is
>
> fair from a strict principal point of view
> but
> without merit from a technical point of view.
I agree that it's necessary, but by the same token the current solution, using
repo tags, is inadequate anyway.
Ever tried cross-dependency resolution between freshrpms/AT/DAG/Dries? Good
luck not finding *some* package that you have to exclude/manually update
because one of the four either incremented the epoch or has a tag that
supersedes another in some way.
That is a very strange thing you say here. Because FreshRPMS, Dries and I
are building the same stuff from exactly the same sources. They are all
completely compatible and I'd like to know what incompatibilities you have
discovered and did not tell :)
I'm not saying that the above is unnecessary, either - those
decisions are
made for valid reasons, but usually from within the context of *that* repo,
not from the overall context of the whole,
Very strange, as we put a lot of work in making everything compatible. I
have no experience with ATrpms, but I know Axel is very dedicated to
compatability.
IMHO. There needs to be a way to
allow repositories to have some sort of meaning - so that Repo A's package
can't overwrite repo B's package, when said package is part of a larger
application (example: xmms, xmms-skins, etc), *without* incrementing the epoch
and subsequently causing *versions* not to matter anymore.
Try out smart:
http://dag.wieers.com/packages/smart/
Especially the GUI and look at the website for some information how it
works.
Maybe a 'release' epoch that doesn't supersede version?
It's called pinning in apt, called priorities in smart and Yum and up2date
lack the functionality.
In Smart you can set priorities per package and per repository and smart
will try cleverly to resolve conflicts and does not try to upgrade in all
cases (a bit like apt, but smarter).
-- dag wieers, dag(a)wieers.com,
http://dag.wieers.com/ --
[all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power]