What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?

Adam Williamson awilliam at redhat.com
Tue Jan 25 19:06:09 UTC 2011


On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 12:00 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:

> > How about this for a proposal:
> > Have gnome shell obsolete gnome-panel < 2.90 and require gnome-panel,
> > metacity (since it needs these for fall back). I think that will do what
> > you want. (Note there isn't a 2.9x version of metacity, so you obsoleting
> > that gets a lot trickier.) As long as gnome-panel-2.9x isn't packaged
> > in F13 or F14 as an update this should work.
> 
> I'm not sure that such an Obsoletes will do anything, as long as a
> gnome-panel >= 2.90 is in F15.

I agree, but I think the approach possibly has merit with a tweak. How
about gnome-panel is renamed gnome-panel-legacy , gnome-shell obsoletes
gnome-panel and requires gnome-panel-legacy ? I think that way you'd get
gnome-shell on upgrade but at least would be able to remove it, and it's
at least a _more_ correct description of the relationships.

(Side note: I think we might all have found things rather easier if we
used a meta-package approach rather than comps; for me, one thing this
discussion exposes is that things are a lot harder because comps -
obviously - isn't considered by yum. If we had a 'task-gnome'
metapackage which expressed what packages are required for the desired
GNOME desktop experience, it'd make things a lot easier, because that
could require gnome-shell , but you could always remove the task-gnome
metapackage if you wanted to...people who didn't fiddle with anything
would get gnome-shell on upgrade, people who fiddle with things get to
keep both pieces.)
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net



More information about the test mailing list