On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 00:22 +0200, Dag Wieers wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I need yum-arch on RHEL4, yum does not come with RHEL4 so I took the
> CentOS package, but this one requires a yumconf package (satisfied by
> centos-yumconf) which I thought was pretty strange.
>
> Why does one require a yumconf package uberhaupt ? Why are we limiting a
> generally useful package to CentOS (or a system that provides yumconf) ?
>
> I know you can fix it in several ways, but I'm more concerned about having
> the dependency there in the first place. I always considered dependencies
> much like strictly necessary to use this package, and in this case it does
> not seem to be very mandatory. (config files you can add yourself easily
> one way or the other if you require them)
>
> My vote would go for removing the dependency. (now that I have installed
> centos-yumconf on RHEL4 and disabled all the functionality)
>
> -- dag wieers, dag@xxxxxxxxxx, http://dag.wieers.com/ --
> [all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power]
> _______________________________________________
Well ... the purpose for having a separate configuration file is SO it
can be more flexible and a third party app can also provide a separate
configuration.
Having a separate configuration file was requested, and not making it
required can lead to people installing yum and not having a
configuration. The way it is now, a RHEL_config.rpm file (or a
taolinux_config.rpm file, or a wbel_config.rpm) could easily be produced
and use the original yum as well.
So, I would argue that it makes the original yum more (an not less)
usable :)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20050713/29934cb5/attachment.bin
