llvm case study: yum's handling of newly-converted noarch subpackages
metherid at gmail.com
Wed Jun 9 04:49:07 UTC 2010
On 06/09/2010 10:13 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> A lot of software we ship supports more than just Fedora, you just can't
> expect all options to work on Fedora.
> As for yum in particular, there are plenty of ways to end up with a broken
> setup by modifying yum.conf, e.g. exclude=kdelibs will definitely let you end
> up with broken dependencies from updates if you have ANY KDE packages
> installed, likewise exclude=xulrunner if you have Firefox or any other Gecko-
> using package installed. You just cannot expect any random setting in yum.conf
> to result in a working setup.
> The defaults are set the way they are for a reason.
I don't buy your argument and trashing anyone's opinion you disagree
with you as "crap" and "nonsense" is hardly going to help make your
case. Excluding a dependency and setting a multi_lib option is hardly
the same thing. Anyway, I am pretty sure none of the yum developers
are going to agree with your view point either. Again, it in our
responsibility towards users to include options that we can support or
mark them as unsupported.
More information about the devel