[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: ATrpms and FC5/RHEL5



Axel Thimm wrote:
So, is there interest to have ATrpms for FC5 less overlapping with
core packages?
Less overlap is probably a good thing. It should at least free up some of your resources
for non-overlapping packages.

However, I doubt that overlaps can be completely eliminated, or that it is even desirable to completely eliminate them, so I think it is more important to have a clear mechanism to allow the user to control the default choice, and to be able to override it if desired.

If so, is there any redhat.com folk that would be willing to add
versioned obsoletes/provides to core specfiles? That's neccessary to
ensure upgradability.

Hopefully, but what can we do to minimize their effort?

John


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]