On 04/07/2011 11:24 PM, JD wrote: > They offer rpms for apps the main fedora repo does not provide, but > link them with libraries and packages with a slightly different > build and version number than what Fedora Repo DOES provide, thus > breaking the dependency chain. It is unlikely that RPM Fusion would do that. Most maintainers in that repo are Fedora maintainers. So is the atrpms maintainer for that matter. You should just not mix conflicting third party repositories. Either use one or the other and cherry pick carefully if you must. > I was hoping that Redhat would lower the boom and tell these repo > maintainers that they cannot name their package names with the > fc14 (or in general fcN), if they break Redhat's fcN releases > dependency chains, and should not duplicate libraries in /lib and > /usr/lib, which Redhat Fedora already provides. There are no trademarks over a name like "fc" that Red Hat holds. These packages don't have "Fedora" or "Red Hat' in their names and even if they would, trying to claim trademark rights over package names would be overreaching. I don't think a legal hammer is the solution to this problem Rahul -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
