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

Re: FC4 Repositories

Michael A. Peters wrote:
On Wed, 2005-06-08 at 21:12 -0400, Temlakos wrote:

When will the Fedora Extras and Livna repositories be ready, and when will I be able to download the latest version of apt from download.redhat.com for use with FC4?

FC4 Extras should be ready when FC4 is released.
At least it looks that way.

rpm.livna.org has repos for FC4T2 and FC4T3 so my guess they also will
publish shortly after FC4 release.

I've already decided to wipe everything out and start clean, in order to eliminate some repo mixing problems I've been having. If I read things right, I should be able to use Fedora Extras, Livna, JPackage, and a "Flash" repo for most, if not all, of my open-source software needs. For the rest, I'll get the rpm's or the tarballs.

imho that is a good idea

Also: will the FreshRPMS/Dag/Dries/Axel family of repos be compatible with the Extras/Livna family or not? If I may so observe, the continued incompatibilities between the two families serves no one's interest, as far as I can see--least of all that of the Fedora Core user.

The FreshRPMS maintainer has contributed some of his stuff to Extras.
I have no clue about Dag/Dries/Axel. I don't use them. I don't need

I know I will get disagreements, but imho it is the responsibility of
third party repositories to make sure they don't conflict with
Core/Updates/Extras as those are officially sanctioned repositories.
While not sanctioned by RH/Fedora due to legal reasons, they also should
not conflict with rpm.livna.org since that is where a lot of Extras/Core
developers put their stuff that is not suitable for Extras.

Some cooperation is nice, and it is available - the maintainers of those
repos are free to participate in discussions on the lists, and some of
them do.

I agree with you on that line.

In answer to Alexander, yes, I've been following the discussion. In my opinion the discussion has been inconclusive. Which is a polite way of saying that I have seen nothing that I can safely construe as a pledge by any repo maintainer to maintain compatibility with Extras or Livna. All I'm doing now is asking for that pledge--and asking it here, in this forum, which is probably the most appropriate forum for such a discussion, anyway.

And I'm asking for that pledge after Synaptic broke and stayed broken and is still broken--and I'm not likely to fix it this side of the FC4 release. And frankly, I don't need to read any more explanations of why any particular package is broken, and why I had to remove a package and then re-install it just to make that throbbing screamer ("explanation point") go away. More to the point, I have clients, whom I am trying to persuade to go to Linux, who will want a set-and-forget solution, or close to it. I'm trying to build one--say, by turning on the yum service to enable nightly updates on a server that is on 24/7, or learning how to use cron. But I can't do that if I'm going to have broken dependencies. Neither can my clients.


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