Fedora Extras is extra

Dag Wieers dag at wieers.com
Wed Dec 1 00:36:30 UTC 2004


On Tue, 30 Nov 2004, Bernd Radinger wrote:

> On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 15:31:37 -0600, Jeff Vian <jvian10 at charter.net> wrote:
> >
> > 2.  It tried to remove libaasound.so.2 and libFLAC.so.4 plus one other I
> > don't remember.  All of which were required for one or more packages
> > already installed
> 
> 'flac' and 'alsa-lib' are from FC, not Fedora.us.

flac and alsa-lib are from FC _only_ starting from FC2 ! Before it was not 
and other repositories provided it. freshrpms was providing alsa-lib as 
far as back in RH7.3 IIRC.

Reality is more complex than just 'extra repositories should not replace 
core packages'. What if Core packages suddenly replace extra packages 
that have been provided by repositories for years ?

It has happened before and will happen again, and sure Fedora Extras can 
make sure that their packages will not break as the same people will be 
ultimately in control. If there's no communication, 3rd party repositories 
will effectively be excluded.


> > 3. process of elimination identified the problem repo.
> > I removed repos, one at a time, and tried the update with each removal,
> > then re-added thttp://www.wellsfargo.com/hat repo and removed the next.
> > dag, newrpms, freshrpms, atrpms, then last fedora.us. 
> 
> That is a side-effect of repository-mixing. Some of the other
> repositories do upgrade or modify 'alsa-lib' and 'flac', Fedora.us
> doesn't.

*FUD alert*

Fedora Core upgraded our packages in both cases. And we stopped providing 
them. No modification, no upgrading of core packages. Nothing whatsover, 
please verify your facts.

I also have to correct you about the pain, there was _no_ pain involved in 
upgrading these cases. I wish you would have tried it instead of talking 
about it.

--  dag wieers,  dag at wieers.com,  http://dag.wieers.com/  --
[All I want is a kind word, a warm bed and unlimited power.]




More information about the fedora-list mailing list