On Sun, 2006-07-09 at 13:12 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote: > Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote: > > On Sun, 9 Jul 2006, Jesse Keating wrote: > > >> We've been selectively backporting the parts from upstream that make sense. > >> There are some changes that have gone into the upstream RPM releases that > >> we're really not comfortable consuming, such as soft requires (suggests, > >> recommends, enhances) stuff like that. I think there are many more examples > >> of feature sets that we're really not comfortable with, I don't have a list > >> in front of me. > > > > That "soft requires" is one of the key differences between rpm and deb. > > If jbj is trying to get rpm and deb closer, are we getting in the way of > > that perhaps-worthy goal by dragging our feet? > > IMO, there are a few features from upstream rpm that I would love Fedora > to have, among them including "soft requires", sane(r) handling of > dangling symlinks and unowned directories, automatic dependancy > generation for libtool archives (and potentially corolary to that, > pkg-config bits). > And as I said before - the 'soft requires' need to have a lot of policy decided on before we throw them into the tree. Not only for kickstart but also for yum and policy for how things like 'enhances' will be moderated in extras. Doing it willy-nilly is a path to pain. -sv _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board-readonly mailing list fedora-advisory-board-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board-readonly
