On Wed, 2005-02-02 at 14:05 -0500, Eric S. Raymond wrote: > Greg Knaddison <greg.knaddison@xxxxxxxxx>: > > Or is it more: "yum configuration files are generally fine, but can > > become complicated with dependency relationships and specilalized > > repositories" > > More that. The syntax of yum.conf isn't bad, it's having to maintain > a model of inter-repository dependencies and update it periodically > that hurts. The problem I've seen is that even the repositories aren't sure who they are and are not compatible with. So trusting a repositories claim about what it is compat or dependent on is a dicey affair. In addition I agree with rgb - doing a redirect from a repo is a little scary to me. I don't mind trusting 1 repo, but I do mind letting them repoint me to some other random place and make me pull down all those pkgs, too. If you want to talk about a way to add to the metadata to define inter- repository-dependency-sets then that's a whole other discussion, and probably one best suited for fedora-devel-list, or freshrpms-list or maybe rpm-metadata's list. I think there could be merit in exporting a unique'd set of requires/provides from each repository and overlaying them to see where things clash and where there is no dependency-set closure across multiple repositories. Right now you can calculate set- closure by taking the metadata from each repositories and simply marking off requires as you encounter the provide that matches it. If you end up with any extra requires then, well, you don't have closure across those repositories. I think posting revolving notices of which repositories combined with which base distros provide closure would be a fun little report to have posted on a regular basis. -sv
