FC5 and Yum Plugins

[Jarod Wilson]

On Friday 30 December 2005 01:27, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-12-30 at 01:17 -0800, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> > Whoops, misread what Thorsten said, I think. I don't think he was
> > advocating for mythtv into Extras, he was talking about putting it into
> > another repo. What's wrong with the ATrpms version? Is it simply a matter
> > of principle that people refuse to use the ATrpms package(s), since
> > ATrpms can/does override core packages? A protectbase option seems like
> > an idea solution for that, so why dismiss it w/"use a repo that doesn't
> > override"...
>
> The question is, what good is this plugin doing?  If you enable a 3rd
> party repo, to get something like MythTV, you'll need to get the deps.
> If the deps happen to replace core/extras packages, then they do.  They
> are necessary for the software you are asking to install.  So you're
> going to override it to install your software.  This is in the install
> context.  In the update context, then sure if the 3rd party repo nvr for
> a package is higher than the nvr for the core/extras package then this
> plugin might be useful to ignore that, unless ignoring would break deps
> with something like MythTV.  Seems to me that there should be a
> different method than just protecting core/extras.  Seems the
> 'protection' should be based around replacing for no other reason than
> nvr comparison.  If the replacement is pulled in for an honest dep
> satisfaction, rather than just a higher nvr comparison, then it should
> be allowed.  Otherwise prompt user or block.  This keeps 3rd party repos
> working properly and keeps users systems as close to strict core/extras
> as possible w/out breaking user installed software.

I believe you just summed up exactly what I'd more or less ideally like to see 
out of this, just much more clearly so. :) I'd definitely agree that not 
core-stomping is a much more relevant issue when it comes to an upgrade than 
an install of new software.

On a new install via yum, you get asked if you really want to install, with it 
shown plain as day what repo packages are coming from. Though its possible 
that a package from core would also satisfy the dependency of a new package 
you've requested to install out of a 3rd-party repo, but the 3rd-party repo 
happens to also have a version of that dependency that's "newer", so yeah, 
the package you're actually requesting to install would maybe have to have an 
explicit Requires: <dep> >= <version from 3rd-party repo>, otherwise install 
core version, if it exists... (I think that's what you said too).

-- 
Jarod Wilson
jarod at wilsonet.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20051230/fe30cfd5/attachment.sig>