On Sun, Sep 28, 2003 at 04:49:29PM -0400, seth vidal wrote: > > > it is something to do with how he does his atrpms package and > > > something I don't agree with. > > > > Well, didn't even know that until now. What's wrong with splitting a > > package into bin and config components? > > look at the complaint by the user - you're tying the user to your > packaging of things and only your packaging of things. That's not true. You can get my src.rpm and update to any daily or whatever one likes. Packaging means making some decisions and providing src.rpms means letting an (experienced) user apply his own choices. Feel free to use the atrpms' src.rpm and update to the daily yum. > that's icky. If http://dict.leo.org/?search=icky&searchLoc=0&relink=on&spellToler=standard§Hdr=on&tableBorder=1&cmpType=relaxed&lang=en is right, then that's not a nice thing to say :( -- Axel.Thimm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.dulug.duke.edu/pipermail/yum/attachments/20030929/5292bee7/attachment.bin
