Petr "Qaxi" Klíma wrote:
Diversity adds a lot of value. If EPEL will be only repo nobody on
RHEL workstation can see/listen MP3, WMA, DVD playing, because of
interesting US software patent and millenium act law.
That's not what I meant. Obviously we need additional packages in
other repositories and that will be true as long as there is any
policy that might exclude any contribution to a centrally managed
repository. The question is, why do we need/want different versions
of the same-named packages, or packages that provide different
versions of the same files that can overwrite each other based on
conditions we can't control? There probably is a good reason to want
this - I just can't think of it right now.
That's easy:
(this is example, has no reflection to current state ...)
EPEL provides xmms-1.2.10-1.i586.rpm - but without MP3, WMA, AAC ...
DAG provides xmms-1.2.9-1.rf.i586.rpm - with all those beasts
ATRPM provides xmms-1.2.10-1.at.i586.rpm - with all those beasts
Which you installs? Who knows, probably EPEL ...
Solution?
Repo priorities and includes
But wouldn't it be easier if the packages had different names so you
could just install the one(s) you want from the command line?
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
