Excessive package interdependency

[Nicolas Mailhot]

Le ven 19/12/2003 à 23:10, Jeremy Katz a écrit :
> On Fri, 2003-12-19 at 09:49 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> > Well just remember when a group member is explicitely not
> > selected/uninstalled. I know it's nice to force software on users so
> > they can test it;) but I can tell you that from a user POV combing rpm
> > -qa, removing stuff (-e --nodeps) and playing with --justdb to untangle
> > the result is irritating at times.
> 
> How do you propose to track selection?  Also, originally selected
> doesn't imply that it remains on the system.  A lot of people do the
> basic install and then start removing things afterwards (ie, just what
> you said) and so do you track that it got removed?  Otherwise, you get
> things added back everytime you upgrade which is annoying (or would be o
> me ;)

Easily ;) enough - keep a mini group db alongside the rpm db, when a
package is removed and was in a group you tag the group definition.

Once all packages in a group are removed/a mandatory part of a group is
removed the group is forgotten (maybe with a warning ?). Groups would be
a level of abstraction above the rpms, so they need similar
infrastructure, but with slightly different rules (ie groups use the rpm
db for dep checks, things like libraries almost never end up in groups -
you only expose user-level components in them, if some of them need
low-level packages it's the package manager to find them out)

Cheers,

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Ceci est une partie de message num?riquement sign?e.
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20031220/13c05743/attachment.sig>