On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 00:24 +0000, Tony wrote:
> On 11/11/05, Deim ?goston <ago@xxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > centos team chose to call their package sqlite rather than
> sqlite3, so
> > accidentally clashing with Dag's rpmforge package name. I
> think I'll be
> I think you can blame on RedHat. They chose the package names.
> Don't
> forget that CentOS tem "just" rebuild the source rpms. To be
> fully
> compatible they even mirror the bugs... (eg.: anaconda
> installer bug with
> raid1 root partition and grub)
>
> No blame coming from here- I try not to do blame culture, and
> especially in this case given that the Centos folks do an amazing job
> for free - and can't be expected to test against 3rd party
> repositories like Dags.
>
> I'm pretty sure it's not from RedHat, though under normal
> circumstances you'd be right. If I read the centos 4.2 release notes
> correctly, their sqlite package has come in to improve yum performance
> as part of the centos replacement for the Redhat Network.
>
> It would be cool if centos could change their package name to sqlite3
> and make that come through to replace their sqlite package asap, but I
> don't know if that type of update is even possible, let alone
> warranted given the tiny minority (1?) who are probably affected by it
> versus the risks of screwing up a bunch of other people's happy
> centos4.2 systems.
>
>
The sqlite package does come from the upstream provider ... just not the
RHEL branch, it is from the fedora branch. That is what we do ... take
the upstream code as is.
I know that it does conflict with Dag's sqlite 2 .. and I am sorry, but
we need to maintain compatibility with the upstream provider, since if
we add other items that use sqlite, we will need to have that
compatibility.
-------------- 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/20051110/0ca47c14/attachment.bin
