On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 01:52:59PM -0400, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 19:46:48 +0200 > Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > That sounds more like using the tarball though. If a software's use is > > only restricted to looking onto it in a chroot or perform limited > > operation with is as to not shoot away the rest of the system it > > should not be a yum install bomb away from your fingertipps (well, not > > your, but the users') > > Again, if it is made to live completely outside the range of the system > yum and not to interact at all with any thing that uses rpmlib, how can > it "bomb" your system? rpm(5) is a tool to manipulate the filesystem by default under /. If rpm5 is even deprived of the knowledge of what is already there any file operation rpm5 will be doing will be wrong. It will not know how to call existing package's %preun/%postun script, neither that the package is an upgrade vs a new install etc. > The value would be that it's pre-compiled for our distro, No, it can't be. The distro is defined by paramters like kernel, glibc version and among other rpm and the rpmdb. If it is incompatible with out rpmdb, it isn't compiled for our distro, just like a xen image of Ubuntu running under Fedora isn't compiled for our distro either. > (and this is all technical discussion, not a single thought to the > political in this reply) Sure, but the technical differences stem from a political fork. And rpm5 hasn't a chance with the technical constraints, just like kernel22 wouldn't have, and at least there the politics are sane. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpBeckc3mfhv.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
