kernel-devel: should yum install, not update?

[Axel Thimm]

On Sat, Jan 22, 2005 at 10:33:05PM -0600, Michael Favia wrote:
> Dave Jones wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 22, 2005 at 03:22:53PM -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> > 
> >  > Providing 'kernel-modules' on the other hand... i don't think anything
> >  > requires 'kernel-modules' so it might be okay to make kernel-devel
> >  > provide that but i still seems to me like potential double-meaning to
> >  > what 'kernel-modules' means since kernel-devel doesnt actually include
> >  > a single kernel-module.
> >  > 
> >  > Maybe  Dave Jones can be poked into making a comment about this.
> > 
> > Adding either of the provides seems like a rather ugly hack.
> > up2date already has the smarts to installonly the -devel package,
> > so I'm of the opinion yum should be fixed to do the right thing too.
> > Jeremy is rebuilding yum as I type for tomorrows rawhide to
> > take care of this issue.
> 
> Yes but the real question is "Where does this information belong?" I
> dont think that these things should be managed ad-hoc by each competing
> package manager but instead internalized into the packages themselves
> somehow for scalabiltiy and adaptability purposes.

It has often been suggested to add a new rpm tag for this
purpose. E.g. you could have

UpdateMode: (installation|alwaysupgrade)

or

AutoUpgrade: no

rpm 4.4 would be a good candidate to get this in.
-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- 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/20050123/c7190a70/attachment.sig>