On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 09:43:48AM -0400, Steven Crothers wrote: > > Why should a PHP 5.3 package provide PHP? To many libs are different, > and it would allow for the installation of something like php-ldap > from base to a php53 which provided the php dependency. That is not > how RPM's are supposed to work. PHP 5.1 is significantly different > enough to warrant a different package. Would you package postgres84 to > satisfy postgres? No, because it would be wrong. A more correct > solution would be to change the dependencies for the cross-php > packages to allow for a php or php53 to satisfy. Many packages work just fine with 5.3; a simple -compat package could Provide: php and permit such to install and work without issue. Note that I am not arguing that there are some significant differences between the legacy 5.1 and the more modern 5.3 only that for the example I cited in a later reply should work with the 5.3 from upstream if the needed deps were matched. And to be honest, for all I know this specific issue may have already been addressed by upstream. John -- "I am on a drug, its called 'Charlie Sheen'. It's not available cuz if you try it once you will die. Your face will melt off and children will weep over your exploded body." -- Charlie Sheen
Attachment:
pgpAHEWL9uf8J.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
