Hans de Goede
j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl
Fri Jul 28 09:52:17 UTC 2006
Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> Le vendredi 28 juillet 2006 à 10:02 +0200, Hans de Goede a écrit :
>> I keep hearing this argument, that the packages for the involved drivers
>> can be made to conflict with the update. Which in essence will deprive
>> all but the most technical of our users from security updates. So this
>> is a moot argument. ?
> No, this is an argument for fixing yum so it can do partial repo updates
> and not block on the first problem/conflict, and yum is FLOSS so it's
> within Fedora mission, so work on getting yum fixed. (again, useful
> feedback why do you insist on focusing on an issue no one but NVidia can
Good point, agreed.
> However to cut this thread short : unlike most technical posters you
> think closed drivers could be supported with a reasonable amount of work
> without hurting the rest of the system. So let's make a deal - maintain
> the NVidia drivers in that-other-repo for six months, and if you make it
> to the end without thinking as everyone else it's a total waste of time
> and energy, we'll talk again.
Clever trick. This is the first post in this thread that has put a smile
on my face :) Nope sorry I'm very much in favor of opensource myself and
have no wish to support / put effort in binary crap. I keep saying
people are not hearing what I'm trying to say, so let me try again: I
don't say we should support it, but deliberately braking it is another
Now if the update would get hold back untill that other repo has
packages in place which work around this (putting conflicts in the
relevant packages and an exclude for the xorg server in yum.conf should
do the trick) then we are getting somewhere.
My big problem is the attitude that the breaking is somebody elses
problem entirely and the total refusal to think with that other repo
instead of just rampaging forward, breaking many systems and creating a
lot of bad PR in the process.
More information about the devel