fedora-release-$PRODUCT, /etc/issue, /etc/os-release, Per-Product Configs and more!
sgallagh at redhat.com
Mon Jun 30 19:57:27 UTC 2014
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 06/30/2014 03:54 PM, James Antill wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-06-30 at 14:59 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>> Additionally, I am working on a proposal for per-product
>> configs in
> I think you can go with something very close to this design _if_
> you always have a product. This would mean that even a minimal
> Fedora install would need a system-release-minimal, or whatever.
> Then all the product subpackages can use the "least requires wins"
> method of compare providers to make it work (the above is said
> without any testing). You can keep all the conflicts, but they are
> more like asserts than something used to help pick the correct
> subpackage, currently.
So for F21 at least, we may have to go with "what you start with is
what you're stuck with" as an approach and solve it better in the future.
>> the Fedora 21 timeframe which is dependent on the above. It
>> should be noted that this is an interim solution only; in Fedora
>> 22 we will be able to vastly simplify this situation with the
>> weak dependency support in RPM 4.12. (I was looking for a link
>> detailing all of these weak deps, but I cannot find one. If you
>> know of such a document, please reply and add it).
> I don't see how weak deps. will solve any of your problems. If dnf
> +rpmbuild+createrepo/etc also has support for the planned _rich_
> deps. then you should be able to do something like:
> Require: config-server if system-release-server (is
> installed) Require: config-workstation if
> system-release-workstation (is installed)
> ...which is what you are trying to express. Also DNF should be
> better able to handle the conflicts with backtracking too, so
> there's that.
Right, I said "weak" when I mean "rich", which is extremely embarassing :)
But yeah, that's pretty much what we want there and if we can push
hard for that in Fedora 22, I think that's a major win.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the devel