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

Re: KDE Sub-Packaging Approach on Fedora



Hugo Cisneiros wrote:
On Tuesday 20 June 2006 10:33, Rex Dieter wrote:

Jonathan Underwood wrote:

OK - I'd missed that subtelty, sorry. I suppose that's the best (most
consistent) situation that can be hoped for.

Or, follow what koffice in Extras did, and use a meta-package named
koffice-suite.  A nice advantage of this approach is that since the old
name is no longer being used, we have the opportunity to drop all those
darn Epoch's from kde packaging.


And break with upstream package name, package name that the current users are already accustomed, and kdebase and kdelibs should not be sub-packaged, so they will still have these nasty Epochs. I see no advantages here.

Not if you properly Provides/Obsoletes the old name. Obviously, the subpackaging idea doesn't extend to *all* kde packages, only for the ones for which it makes sense.

BTW, I had difficulties into installing koffice because of this reason: a simply yum install koffice didn't work. Then I installed one for one until I found out koffice-suite exists (dumb me!) :)

I consider that a bug/shortcoming of yum. koffice-suite properly Provides/Obsoletes "koffice", but 'yum install' doesn't grok "Provides", only real pkgs. ):

-- rex


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