ATrpms and FC5/RHEL5

Jarod Wilson jarod at
Tue Jan 3 05:53:35 UTC 2006

On Monday 02 January 2006 21:33, Jeff Pitman wrote:
> On 1/3/06, Jarod Wilson <jarod at> wrote:
> > On Monday 02 January 2006 18:12, Warren Togami wrote:
> > > If you have concerns about individual packages, please file bugs in Red
> > > Hat Bugzilla.  Changes can be made to individual Core/Extras packages
> > > are usually general bug fixes and enhancements.  It is wrong to expect
> > > Fedora to make special concessions only to work around problems
> > > introduced by 3rd parties.  If it is the right thing to do in general
> > > cases, then it is proper to make changes to Core/Extras.
> >
> > I'm not talking so much about problems introduced by 3rd-parties as I am
> > about problems/deficiencies uncovered by 3rd-parties, i.e., fixing
> > packages in Core in a timely fashion to eliminate the need of 3rd-party
> > packagers to replace Core components.
> Also, it's good to have allies on the inside.

Very true. Most 3rd-party repos don't, apparently.

> See jpackage FAQ about 
> "I tried to install foo on Fedora Core 2, but got lots of error
> messages and/or things don't work":
> Note the line:
> """This issue should be fixed in Fedora Core 3, thanks to Red Hat's
> involvement in JPackage."""

So the anti-3rd-party repository stance isn't unilaterally applied against all 
3rd-party repos, I take it?

> Google cache from one of the messages since the archive is broke:
> Sound familiar? And, in about 6 months "Core/Extras vs 3rd Party"
> might show up on this list again...

Yeah, most likely. But hey, if JPackage can get Red Hat's help, I don't see 
why other repositories can't...

Jarod Wilson
jarod at
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list